Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
2.
Front Public Health ; 7: 353, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31867299

RESUMEN

Introduction: From the workplace engineering sciences, it is evident that work efficiency, measured by the criteria efficiency and effectiveness of therapy, economy and patient safety, is determined mainly by staff acceptance of new technology and reengineered workflows. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to ascertain and assess differences in terms of the acceptance of alternative types of prosthesis instrument configurations, oriented around the research question: "Which product features and process effects determine a high level of employee acceptance of use?" Materials and Methods: This study is designed as a before-and-after comparison, based on the usability engineering approach. In the first study phase, 46 employees participating in the process of providing instruments for a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedure were asked to examine the current working situation, using a standard instrumentation set, in terms of instrument handling, work burden, proneness to errors, patient risks, process efficiency, and effectiveness. In the second study phase, 20 weeks after having implemented a size-specific instrumentation set, the same 46 individuals were surveyed on the identical questions. Additionally, in both study phases the time needed to perform the sub-processes related to instrumentation logistics inside the operating room (OR) was measured, in order to identify process efficiency and cost-saving effects. Results: By using standard sets only 30% perceived a need for improvement. After 20 weeks, only 8% of the employees were satisfied with the previous equipment and 69% regarded the standard set as being relatively error-prone, endangering patient safety. In addition, 85% regarded the effectiveness of the standard process as limited. Finally, 75% considered the effectiveness of the reengineered process to be significantly higher, and 69% drew attention to the reduction of handling disadvantages. Furthermore, the time needed for instrumentation logistics inside the OR estimated at about 13 min less when using size-specific sets. This effect on process efficiency cost savings or the generation of additional revenue by performing additional procedures. Based on these findings, an ergonomic decision-making model has been developed. Conclusion: Innovative medical products such as size-specific instrumentation sets contribute to lower procedure costs and improved process efficiency in the operating room (OR). However, employee motivation to use a new technology as part of an optimized workflow organization, is crucial to achieving an enhanced level of effectiveness, efficiency and patient safety. Hence, it is advisable to enhance change-management efforts in order to reduce resistance to change and ensure the new technology is successful.

4.
Orthopade ; 48(11): 963-968, 2019 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31506824

RESUMEN

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a frequent operation in Germany and in 2017 a total of 191,272 interventions were carried out. These interventions are associated with high costs and involve complex clinical workflow organization and time-consuming instrument logistics. With this in mind, the aim of this study was to identify the economic potential of the instrument configuration in order to optimize the entire process in TKA. Changing the composition of the set of instruments used in the operating theater for TKA resulted in time and cost saving for the complete TKA procedure, including all personnel and off-shoot procedures. In addition, the operating time saved by the introduction of a patient-specific instrumentation set meant that the operating theater could be used for more or other surgical procedures, also generating additional revenue.


Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/instrumentación , Quirófanos/organización & administración , Osteoartritis de la Rodilla/cirugía , Instrumentos Quirúrgicos/economía , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/economía , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/métodos , Ahorro de Costo , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Eficiencia , Alemania , Costos de Hospital , Humanos , Quirófanos/economía
6.
Adv Health Care Manag ; 17: 223-52, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25985514

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Hospitals worldwide are facing the same opportunities and threats: the demographics of an aging population; steady increases in chronic diseases and severe illnesses; and a steadily increasing demand for medical services with more intensive treatment for multi-morbid patients. Additionally, patients are becoming more demanding. They expect high quality medicine within a dignity-driven and painless healing environment. The severe financial pressures that these developments entail oblige care providers to more and more cost-containment and to apply process reengineering, as well as continuous performance improvement measures, so as to achieve future financial sustainability. At the same time, regulators are calling for improved patient outcomes. Benchmarking and best practice management are successfully proven performance improvement tools for enabling hospitals to achieve a higher level of clinical output quality, enhanced patient satisfaction, and care delivery capability, while simultaneously containing and reducing costs. APPROACH: This chapter aims to clarify what benchmarking is and what it is not. Furthermore, it is stated that benchmarking is a powerful managerial tool for improving decision-making processes that can contribute to the above-mentioned improvement measures in health care delivery. The benchmarking approach described in this chapter is oriented toward the philosophy of an input-output model and is explained based on practical international examples from different industries in various countries. FINDINGS: Benchmarking is not a project with a defined start and end point, but a continuous initiative of comparing key performance indicators, process structures, and best practices from best-in-class companies inside and outside industry. Benchmarking is an ongoing process of measuring and searching for best-in-class performance: Measure yourself with yourself over time against key performance indicators. Measure yourself against others. Identify best practices. Equal or exceed this best practice in your institution. Focus on simple and effective ways to implement solutions. Comparing only figures, such as average length of stay, costs of procedures, infection rates, or out-of-stock rates, can lead easily to wrong conclusions and decision making with often-disastrous consequences. Just looking at figures and ratios is not the basis for detecting potential excellence. It is necessary to look beyond the numbers to understand how processes work and contribute to best-in-class results. Best practices from even quite different industries can enable hospitals to leapfrog results in patient orientation, clinical excellence, and cost-effectiveness. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Despite common benchmarking approaches, it is pointed out that a comparison without "looking behind the figures" (what it means to be familiar with the process structure, process dynamic and drivers, process institutions/rules and process-related incentive components) will be extremely limited referring to reliability and quality of findings. In order to demonstrate transferability of benchmarking results between different industries practical examples from health care, automotive, and hotel service have been selected. Additionally, it is depicted that international comparisons between hospitals providing medical services in different health care systems do have a great potential for achieving leapfrog results in medical quality, organization of service provision, effective work structures, purchasing and logistics processes, or management, etc.


Asunto(s)
Benchmarking , Administración Hospitalaria/tendencias , Internacionalidad , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud , Humanos
7.
Adv Health Care Manag ; 17: 195-219, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25985513

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Point-of-care testing (POCT) at the Emergency Department (ED) attains better objectives in patient care while aiming to achieve early diagnosis for faster medical decision-making. This study assesses and compares the benefits of POCT in the ED in Germany and Malta, while considering differences in their health systems. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This chapter utilizes multiple case study approach using Six Sigma. The German case study assesses the use of POCT in acute coronary syndrome patients, compared to the central lab setting. The Maltese case study is a pilot study of the use of medical ultrasonography as a POCT to detect abdominal free fluid in post-blunt trauma. FINDINGS: This study provides clear examples of the effectiveness of POCT in life-threatening conditions, as compared to the use of traditional central lab or the medical imaging department. Therapeutic quality in the ED and patient outcomes directly depend upon turnaround time, particularly for life-threatening conditions. Faster turnaround time not only saves lives but reduces morbidity, which in the long-term is a critical cost driver for hospitals. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The application of Six Sigma and the international comparison of POCT as best practice for life-threatening conditions in the ED.


Asunto(s)
Traumatismos Abdominales/diagnóstico por imagen , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/normas , Sistemas de Atención de Punto/normas , Evaluación de Procesos, Atención de Salud/normas , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Heridas no Penetrantes/diagnóstico por imagen , Biomarcadores/sangre , Técnicas de Laboratorio Clínico/normas , Eficiencia Organizacional , Alemania , Humanos , Malta , Ultrasonografía
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...