Evaluation of System Modelling Techniques for Waste Identification in Lean Healthcare Applications.
healthcare operations
kaizen
lean healthcare
system approaches
system modelling techniques
value stream map
waste identification
Journal
Risk management and healthcare policy
ISSN: 1179-1594
Titre abrégé: Risk Manag Healthc Policy
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101566264
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
24
09
2020
accepted:
30
10
2020
entrez:
15
1
2021
pubmed:
16
1
2021
medline:
16
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Waste identification plays a vital role in lean healthcare applications. While the value stream map (VSM) is among the most commonly used tools for waste identification, it may be limited to visualize the behaviour of dynamic and complex healthcare systems. To address this limitation, system modelling techniques (SMTs) can be used to provide a comprehensive picture of various system-wide wastes. However, there is a lack of evidence in the current literature about the potential contribution of SMTs for waste identification in healthcare processes. This study evaluates the usability and utility of six types of SMTs along with the VSM. For the evaluation, interview-based questionnaires were conducted with twelve stakeholders from the outpatient clinic at the Heart and Vascular Institute at Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi. VSM was found to be the most useful diagram in waste identification in general. However, some SMTs that represent the system behaviour outperformed the VSM in identifying particular waste types, e.g., communication diagram in identifying over-processing waste and flow diagram in identifying transportation waste. As behavioural SMTs and VSM have unique strengths in identifying particular waste types, the use of multiple diagrams is recommended for a comprehensive waste identification in lean. However, limited resources and time, as well as limited experience of stakeholders with SMTs, may still present obstacles for their potential contribution in lean healthcare applications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33447104
doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S283189
pii: 283189
pmc: PMC7802016
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
3235-3243Informations de copyright
© 2020 Alkaabi et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article. The part of background section of this paper was presented at the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM) as a poster presentation with interim findings. The poster’s paper was published in the proceeding of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM): doi: 10.1109/IEEM44572.2019.8978929.
Références
Qual Saf Health Care. 2005 Apr;14(2):75
pubmed: 15805447
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jan 24;19(1):66
pubmed: 30678663
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2019 Feb 11;32(1):191-207
pubmed: 30859865
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Dec 3;18(1):914
pubmed: 30509286
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Sep 9;19(1):652
pubmed: 31500624
Int J Med Inform. 2007 Jun;76 Suppl 1:S65-77
pubmed: 16828336
Ergonomics. 2010 Jul;53(7):829-47
pubmed: 20582765
Int J Qual Health Care. 2009 Jun;21(3):214-24
pubmed: 19363123
Health Policy. 2015 Sep;119(9):1197-209
pubmed: 25737260
Int J Risk Saf Med. 2015;27(2):67-76
pubmed: 26410009
Health Care Manag Sci. 2008 Mar;11(1):55-65
pubmed: 18390168
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Jan 07;10:7
pubmed: 20056005
BMJ. 2010 Aug 13;341:c4078
pubmed: 20709715
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Feb 01;12:28
pubmed: 22296919
Int J Qual Health Care. 2017 Nov 1;29(7):961-965
pubmed: 29136150
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2013;26(3):220-35
pubmed: 23729126
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Mar 05;9:43
pubmed: 19265518
Int J Qual Health Care. 2018 Apr 1;30(3):227-233
pubmed: 29346654
J Emerg Med. 2009 Aug;37(2):177-82
pubmed: 18722732