Evidence-Based Management, Reconsidered.

Reports of medical mistakes have splashed across newspapers and magazines in the United States. At the same time, instances of overuse, underuse, and misuse of management tactics and strategies receive far less attention. Tactics to increase health systems managers' participation in management research include training in evidence-based management, investment in management research projects, and implementing knowledge management systems. To help in understanding and applying an evidenced-based approach to decision-making, the article excerpt provides practical tools and strategies to develop a questioning organizational culture.

Lean Performance Indicators and Facilitators of Outcomes in U.S. Public Hospitals.

GOAL: This study investigated the association between Lean and performance outcomes in U.S. public hospitals. Public hospitals face substantial pressure to deliver high-quality care with limited resources. Lean-based management systems can provide these hospitals with alternative approaches to improve efficiency and effectiveness. Prior research shows that Lean can have positive impacts in hospitals ranging in ownership type, but more study is needed, specifically in publicly owned hospitals. METHODS: We performed multivariable regressions using data from the 2017 National Survey of Lean/Transformational Performance Improvement. The data were linked to publicly available hospital performance data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. We examined 11 outcomes measuring financial performance, quality of care, and patient experience and their associations with Lean adoption. We also explored potential drivers of positive outcomes by examining Lean implementation in each hospital, measured as the number of units using Lean tools and practices; leader commitment to Lean principles; Lean training and education among physicians, nurses, and managers; and use of a daily management system among C-suite leaders and managers. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Lean adoption and implementation were associated with improved performance in U.S. public hospitals. Compared with hospitals that did not adopt Lean, those that did had significantly lower adjusted inpatient expenses per discharge and higher-than-average national scores on the appropriate use of medical imaging and timeliness of care. The study results also showed marginally significant improvements in patient experience and hospital earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization margins. Focusing on these select outcomes, we found that drivers of such improvements involved the extent of Lean implementation, as reflected by leadership commitment, daily management, and training/education while controlling for the number of years using Lean. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Lean is a method of continuous improvement centered around a culture of providing high-value care for patients. Our findings provide insight into the potential benefits of Lean in U.S. public hospitals. Notably, they suggest that leader buy-in is key to success. When executives and managers support Lean initiatives and provide proper training for the workforce, improved financial and operational performance can result. This commitment, starting with upper management, may also play a broader role in the effort to reform healthcare while having a positive impact on patient care in U.S. public hospitals.

Managing Through a Pandemic: A Daily Management System for COVID-19 Response and Recovery.

GOAL: This study explored the use of a Lean daily management system (DMS) for COVID-19 response and recovery in U.S. hospitals and health systems. Originally developed in manufacturing, Lean is an evidence-based approach to quality and process improvement in healthcare. Although Lean has been studied in individual hospital units and outpatient practices, it has not been examined as a whole system response to crisis events. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with 46 executive leaders, clinical leaders, and frontline staff in four hospitals and health systems across the United States. We developed a semistructured interview guide to understand DMS implementation in these care delivery organizations. As interviews took place 6-8 months following the onset of the pandemic, a subset of our interview questions centered on DMS use to meet the demands of COVID-19. Based on a deductive approach to qualitative analysis, we identified clusters of themes that described how DMS facilitated rapid system response to the public health emergency. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There were many important ways in which U.S. hospitals and health systems leveraged their DMS to address COVID-19 challenges. These included the use of tiered huddles to facilitate rapid communication, the creation of standard work for redeployed staff, and structured problem-solving to prioritize new areas for improvement. We also discovered ways that the pandemic itself affected DMS implementation in all organizations. COVID-19 universally created greater DMS visibility by opening lines of communication among leadership, strengthening measurement and accountability, and empowering staff to develop solutions at the front lines. Many lessons learned using DMS for crisis management will carry forward into COVID-19 recovery efforts. Lessons include expanding telehealth, reactivating incident command systems as needed, and efficiently coordinating resources amid potential future shortages. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Overall, the Lean DMS functioned as a robust property that enabled quick organizational response to unpredictable events. Our findings on the use of DMS are consistent with organizational resilience that emphasizes collective sense-making and awareness of incident status, team decision-making, and frequent interaction and coordination. These features of resilience are supported by DMS practices such as tiered huddles for rapid information dissemination and alignment across organizational hierarchies. When used in conjunction with plan-do-study-act methodology, huddles provide teams with enhanced feedback that strengthens their ability to make changes as needed. Moreover, gaps between work-as-imagined (how work should be done) and work-as-done (how work is actually done) may be exacerbated in the initial chaos of emergency events but can be minimized through the development of standard work protocols. As a facilitator of resilience, the Lean DMS may be used in a variety of challenging situations to ensure high standards of care.

Validation of the Lean Healthcare Implementation Self-Assessment Instrument (LHISI) in the finnish healthcare context.

BACKGROUND: Lean management is growing in popularity in the healthcare sector worldwide, yet healthcare organizations are struggling with assessing the maturity of their Lean implementation and monitoring its change over time. Most existing methods for such assessments are time consuming, require site visits by external consultants, and lack frontline involvement. The original Lean Healthcare Implementation Self-Assessment Instrument (LHISI) was developed by the Center for Lean Engagement and Research (CLEAR), University of California, Berkeley as a Lean principles-based survey instrument that avoids the above problems. We validated the original LHISI in the context of Finnish healthcare. METHODS: The original HISI survey was sent over a secure organizational email system to the over 26,000 employees of the Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa in March 2020. The data were randomly split with one part used to carry out an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and the other for testing the resulting model using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). RESULTS: A total of 6073 employees responded to the LHISI survey, for an overall response rate of 23%. The results indicated that the 43 items used in the original LHISI can be reduced to 25 items, and these items measure a five-dimensional model of the progress of Lean implementation: leadership, commitment, standard work, communication, and daily management system. In comparison with a single-factor model, the fit measures for the 5-factor model were better: smaller X2, larger comparative fit index (CFI), smaller root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and smaller standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). CONCLUSIONS: The 25 item LHISI is valid and feasible to use in the context of Finnish healthcare. The LHISI allows the organization to self-monitor the progress of its Lean implementation and provides the leadership with actionable knowledge to guide the path towards Lean maturity across the organization. Our findings encourage further studies on the adoption and validation of the LHISI in healthcare organizations worldwide.

Benchmarking outcomes on multiple contextual levels in lean healthcare: a systematic review, development of a conceptual framework, and a research agenda.

BACKGROUND: Reliable benchmarking in Lean healthcare requires widely relevant and applicable domains for outcome metrics and careful attention to contextual levels. These levels have been poorly defined and no framework to facilitate performance benchmarking exists. METHODS: We systematically searched the Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify original articles reporting benchmarking on different contextual levels in Lean healthcare and critically appraised the articles. Scarcity and heterogeneity of articles prevented quantitative meta-analyses. We developed a new, widely applicable conceptual framework for benchmarking drawing on the principles of ten commonly used healthcare quality frameworks and four value statements, and suggest an agenda for future research on benchmarking in Lean healthcare. RESULTS: We identified 22 articles on benchmarking in Lean healthcare on 4 contextual levels: intra-organizational (6 articles), regional (4), national (10), and international (2). We further categorized the articles by the domains in the proposed conceptual framework: patients (6), employed and affiliated staff (2), costs (2), and service provision (16). After critical appraisal, only one fifth of the articles were categorized as high quality. CONCLUSIONS: When making evidence-informed decisions based on current scarce literature on benchmarking in healthcare, leaders and managers should carefully consider the influence of context. The proposed conceptual framework may facilitate performance benchmarking and spreading best practices in Lean healthcare. Future research on benchmarking in Lean healthcare should include international benchmarking, defining essential factors influencing Lean initiatives on different levels of context; patient-centered benchmarking; and system-level benchmarking with a balanced set of outcomes and quality measures.

The cross-national applicability of lean implementation measures and hospital performance measures: a case study of Finland and the USA.

BACKGROUND: Health-care organizations around the world are striving to achieve transformational performance improvement, often through adopting process improvement methodologies such as lean management. Indeed, lean management has been implemented in hospitals in many countries. But despite a shared methodology and the potential benefit of benchmarking lean implementation and its effects on hospital performance, cross-national lean benchmarking is rare. Health-care organizations in different countries operate in very different contexts, including different health-care system models, and these differences may be perceived as limiting the ability of improvers to benchmark lean implementation and related organizational performance. However, no empirical research is available on the international relevance and applicability of lean implementation and hospital performance measures. To begin understanding the opportunities and limitations related to cross-national benchmarking of lean in hospitals, we conducted a cross-national case study of the relevance and applicability of measures of lean implementation in hospitals and hospital performance. METHODS: We report an exploratory case study of the relevance of lean implementation measures and the applicability of hospital performance measures using quantitative comparisons of data from Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa (HUS) Helsinki University Hospital in Finland and a sample of 75 large academic hospitals in the USA. RESULTS: The relevance of lean-related measures was high across the two countries: almost 90% of the items developed for a US survey were relevant and available from HUS. A majority of the US-based measures for financial performance (66.7%), service provision/utilization (100.0%) and service provision/care processes (60.0%) were available from HUS. Differences in patient satisfaction measures prevented comparisons between HUS and the USA. Of 18 clinical outcome measures, only four (22%) were not comparable. Clinical outcome measures were less affected by the differences in health-care system models than measures related to service provision and financial performance. CONCLUSIONS: Lean implementation measures are highly relevant in health-care organizations operating in the USA and Finland, as is the applicability of a variety of performance improvement measures. Cross-national benchmarking in lean healthcare is feasible, but a careful assessment of contextual factors, including the health-care system model, and their impact on the applicability and relevance of chosen benchmarking measures is necessary. The differences between the US and Finnish health-care system models is most clearly reflected in financial performance measures and care process measures.

Assessing the relationship of the human resource, finance, and information technology functions on reported performance in hospitals using the Lean management system.

BACKGROUND: Given pressures to control costs and improve quality of care, one of the most prevalent transformational performance improvement approaches in health care is Lean management. However, the roles of support functions such as human resource (HR), finance, and information technology (IT) in Lean management and the relationships of these support functions with performance are unknown. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine the relationships between the HR, finance, and IT functions, overall Lean implementation, and self-reported performance improvement in hospitals that have implemented Lean. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Data from a national survey of Lean in U.S. hospitals (N = 1,222; 847 reported using Lean) were analyzed using multivariable regression and bootstrapped mediation analysis. The extent to which HR, finance, and IT functions support Lean management was measured using indices including six, three, and six items respectively. Lean implementation was measured by the number of units doing Lean (up to 29) and by a four-level self-reported maturity scale. Performance improvement was measured using an index of self-reported achievements (ranging from 0 to 16). RESULTS: There were significant positive associations between Lean HR, finance, and IT functions and self-reported performance impact (controlling for organizational and market variables). Tests of mediation indicated that the associations of HR, finance, and IT functions with self-reported performance were significantly mediated by the number of Lean units (mediated proportion ranging from 40% to 73%), and HR function was also mediated by self-reported maturity (61% mediated). There were no moderating effects. CONCLUSION: HR, finance, and IT functions are positively associated with self-reported Lean impact on performance and primarily explained by the overall degree of Lean implementation. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Efforts to align HR, finance, and IT functions with overall Lean implementation can help to ensure that frontline caregivers and managers have the data and skills required to meet transformational improvement goals.

Adoption of Lean management and hospital performance: Results from a national survey.

BACKGROUND: Despite being adopted by a large number of hospitals, the relationship between Lean management and hospital performance is mixed and not well understood. PURPOSE: We examined the relationships between Lean and hospital financial performance, patient outcomes, and patient satisfaction in a large national sample of hospitals, controlling for relevant organizational and market factors. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A mixed effects linear regression analysis was performed to assess the relationships between adoption of Lean and 10 measures of hospital performance using data from 1,152 hospitals that responded to the 2017 National Survey of Lean/Transformational Performance Improvement in Hospitals. Hospital performance, organizational, and market data over the period 2011-2015 come from the 2015 American Hospital Association Annual Hospital Survey and the respective annual Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare Cost Report, CMS Hospital Compare, CMS MEDPAR, and the CMS Hospital Service Area File. RESULTS: Lean adoption was significantly associated at alpha < .05, with lower Medicare spending per beneficiary (b = -.005, p = .027). None of the other nine associations were statistically significant, although eight of them were in the predicted direction. CONCLUSION: Lean adoption is not associated with most measures of hospital performance. It is likely Lean implementation varies greatly across hospitals. Future research should examine the relationships among the various dimensions of Lean implementation and performance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: If Lean management is to contribute to hospital performance improvement, leaders must be highly cognizant of what "adoption of Lean" actually means in their hospital. Although limited, single-unit Lean initiatives in an emergency room or other patient care unit may improve performance on some unit-specific measures, improvement on hospital-wide measures of performance requires a broad, sustained commitment to the implementation of Lean practices and tools.

Lean Management and U.S. Public Hospital Performance: Results From a National Survey.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Many public hospitals have adopted Lean management methodology, but little is known about the extent of Lean adoption or the relationship between Lean adoption and hospital performance. Using data from the 2017 National Survey of Lean/Transformational Performance Improvement in Hospitals, linked with data from the American Hospital Association 2015 Annual Hospital Survey and 2015 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data on hospital performance, we compare public hospitals with nonprofit and for-profit hospitals on the rate of Lean adoption and the extent of Lean implementation. We also assess the associations between Lean adoption by the end of 2014 and measures of public hospital financial performance, patient outcomes, and patient satisfaction measured in 2015.Among the 288 public hospitals that responded to the survey, 54.2% reported that they had adopted Lean. The average length of time of Lean implementation was 4.58 years. The mean number of units in which Lean was implemented was 11.9 out of 29 possible hospital units, with the emergency department (ED) being the unit in which Lean was most frequently implemented. The most common Lean practices used were daily huddles, plan-do-study-act cycles, visual management, and use of standard work. Lean adoption by 2014 was significantly associated in the direction predicted with earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization margin (b = .042, p < .020) and percentage of patients leaving the ED without being seen (b = -0.610, p < .068). No significant associations were found between Lean adoption and patient outcomes or patient satisfaction.

Use of Lean and Related Transformational Performance Improvement Systems in Hospitals in the United States: Results From a National Survey.

BACKGROUND: The health care system in the United States is costly with high variance in quality. There is growing interest in transformational performance improvement initiatives, such as the Lean management system, to eliminate waste and inefficiency and improve quality of care for patients. METHODS: A national survey of all 4,500 short-term acute general medical/surgical and pediatric hospitals in the United States was fielded between May and September 2017 by the Survey Data Center of the American Hospital Association. RESULTS: Responses were received from 1,222 hospitals (27.3% response rate). Sixty-nine percent (69.3%) reported use Lean or related Lean plus Six Sigma or Robust Process Improvement approaches. Not-for-profit hospitals, hospitals located in metro/urban areas, those belonging to a system/network, and those with 100-399 beds were most likely to be engaged in these activities and for an average of 5.2 years. However, only 12.6% (n = 102) of hospitals reported being at a mature hospitalwide stage of implementation. The degree of maturity, leadership commitment, daily management system use, and training were each positively associated with reported positive performance outcomes. CONCLUSION: A majority of hospitals have adopted Lean-based transformational performance improvement approaches but with wide variance in the degree of implementation. It takes time for Lean to gain traction. The length of time doing Lean is positively associated with implementation progress and reported positive performance impacts. The extent to which Lean has an organizationwide performance impact awaits further research that links the variables in this study with objective cost and quality measures.

The role of health information technology in advancing care management and coordination in accountable care organizations.

BACKGROUND: To be successful, accountable care organizations (ACOs) must effectively manage patient care. Health information technology (HIT) can support care delivery by providing various degrees of coordination. Few studies have examined the role of HIT functionalities or the role of different levels of coordination enabled by HIT on care management processes. PURPOSES: We examine HIT functionalities in ACOs, categorized by the level of coordination they enable in terms of information and work flow, to determine which specific HIT functionalities and levels of coordination are most strongly associated with care management processes. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis was done using 2012 data from the National Survey of Accountable Care Organizations. HIT functionalities are categorized into coordination levels: information capture, the lowest level, which coordinates through standardization; information provision, which supports unidirectional activities; and information exchange, which reflects the highest level of coordination allowing for bidirectional exchange. The Care Management Process index (CMP index) includes 13 questions about the extent to which care is planned, monitored, and supported by providers and patients. Multiple regressions adjusting for organizational and ACO contractual factors are used to assess relationships between HIT functionalities and the CMP index. FINDINGS: HIT functionality coordinating the most complex interdependences (information exchange) was associated with a 0.41 standard deviation change in the CMP index (ß = .41, p < .001), but the associations for information capture (ß = -.01, p = .97) and information provision (ß = .15, p = .48) functionalities were not significant. IMPLICATIONS: The current study has shed some light on the relationship between HIT and care management processes by specifying the coordination roles that HIT may play and, in particular, the importance of information exchange functionalities. Although these represent early findings, further research can help policy makers and clinical leaders understand how to prioritize HIT development given resource constraints.

Contributions of relational coordination to care management in accountable care organizations: Views of managerial and clinical leaders.

BACKGROUND: The accountable care organization (ACO) is a new type of health care organization incentivized to improve quality of care, improve population health, and reduce the cost of care. An ACO's success in meeting these objectives depends greatly upon its ability to improve patient care management. Numerous studies have found relational coordination to be positively associated with key measures of organizational performance in health care organizations, including quality and efficiency. PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is twofold: (a) identify the extent to which ACO leaders are aware of the dimensions of relational coordination, and (b) identify the ways these leaders believe the dimensions influenced care management practices in their organization. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We performed content analysis of interviews with managerial and clinical leaders from a diverse group of 11 ACOs to assess awareness of relational coordination and identify the ways that dimensions of relational coordination were perceived to influence development of care management practices. FINDINGS: ACO leaders mentioned four relational coordination dimensions: shared goals, frequency of communication, timeliness of communication, and problem solving communication. Three dimensions - shared knowledge of team members' tasks, mutual respect, and accuracy of communication - were not mentioned. Our analysis identified numerous ways leaders believed the four mentioned dimensions contributed to the development of care management, including contributions to standardization of care, patient engagement, coordination of care, and care planning. DISCUSSION: We propose two hypotheses for future research on relational coordination and care management. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: If relational coordination is to have a beneficial influence on ACO performance, organizational leaders must become more aware of relational coordination and its various dimensions and become cognizant of relational coordination's influence on care management in their ACO. We suggest a number of means by which ACO leaders could become more aware of relational coordination and its potential effects.

The organizational dynamics enabling patient portal impacts upon organizational performance and patient health: a qualitative study of Kaiser Permanente.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals may lead to enhanced disease management, health plan retention, changes in channel utilization, and lower environmental waste. However, despite growing research on patient portals and their effects, our understanding of the organizational dynamics that explain how effects come about is limited. METHODS: This paper uses qualitative methods to advance our understanding of the organizational dynamics that influence the impact of a patient portal on organizational performance and patient health. The study setting is Kaiser Permanente, the world's largest not-for-profit integrated delivery system, which has been using a portal for over ten years. We interviewed eighteen physician leaders and executives particularly knowledgeable about the portal to learn about how they believe the patient portal works and what organizational factors affect its workings. Our analytical framework centered on two research questions. (1) How does the patient portal impact care delivery to produce the documented effects?; and (2) What are the important organizational factors that influence the patient portal's development? RESULTS: We identify five ways in which the patient portal may impact care delivery to produce reported effects. First, the portal's ability to ease access to services improves some patients' satisfaction as well as changes the way patients seek care. Second, the transparency and activation of information enable some patients to better manage their care. Third, care management may also be improved through augmented patient-physician interaction. This augmented interaction may also increase the 'stickiness' of some patients to their providers. Forth, a similar effect may be triggered by a closer connection between Kaiser Permanente and patients, which may reduce the likelihood that patients will switch health plans. Finally, the portal may induce efficiencies in physician workflow and administrative tasks, stimulating certain operational savings and deeper involvement of patients in medical decisions. Moreover, our analysis illuminated seven organizational factors of particular importance to the portal's development--and thereby ability to impact care delivery: alignment with financial incentives, synergy with existing IT infrastructure and operations, physician-led governance, inclusive decision making and knowledge sharing, regional flexibility to implementation, continuous innovation, and emphasis on patient-centered design. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show how organizational dynamics enable the patient portal to affect care delivery by summoning organization-wide support for and use of a portal that meets patient needs.

The next step towards making use meaningful: electronic information exchange and care coordination across clinicians and delivery sites.

BACKGROUND: Care for patients with chronic conditions often requires coordination between multiple physicians and delivery sites. Electronic Health Record (EHR) use could improve care quality and efficiency in part by facilitating care coordination. OBJECTIVE: We examined the association between EHR use and clinician perceptions of care coordination for patients transferred across clinicians and delivery sites. RESEARCH DESIGN: Repeated surveys of primary care clinicians during the staggered implementation of an outpatient EHR (2005-2008), followed by an integrated inpatient EHR (2006-2010). We measured the association between EHR use stages (no use, outpatient EHR only, and integrated inpatient-outpatient EHR) and care coordination using logistic regression, adjusting for clinician characteristics, study year, and medical center. SUBJECTS: Adult primary care clinicians in a large Integrated Delivery System. MEASURES: Three measures of clinician-reported care coordination for patient care transferred across clinicians (eg, from specialist to primary care team) and across delivery sites (eg, from the hospital to outpatient care). RESULTS: Outpatient EHR use was associated with higher reports of access to complete and timely clinical information and higher agreement on clinician roles and responsibilities for patients transferred across clinicians, but not for patients transferred across delivery sites. Use of the integrated outpatient-inpatient EHR was associated with higher reports of access to timely and complete clinical information, clinician agreement on the patient's treatment plan for patients transferred across delivery sites, and with all coordination measures for patients transferred across clinicians. CONCLUSION: Use of an integrated EHR with health information exchange across delivery settings improved patient care coordination.

Characteristics of patient portals developed in the context of health information exchanges: early policy effects of incentives in the meaningful use program in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in the United States launched the second stage of its Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program, providing financial incentives to providers to meaningfully use their electronic health records to engage patients online. Patient portals are electronic means to engage patients by enabling secure access to personal medical records, communication with providers, various self-management tools, and administrative functionalities. Outcomes of patient portals have mainly been reported in large integrated health systems. This may now change as the EHR Incentive Program enables and supports the use of patient portals in other types of health systems. In this paper, we focus on Health Information Exchanges (HIE): entities that facilitate data exchange within networks of independent providers. OBJECTIVE: In response to the EHR Incentive Program, some Health Information Exchanges in the United States are developing patient portals and offering them to their network of providers. Such patient portals hold high value for patients, especially in fragmented health system contexts, due to the portals' ability to integrate health information from an array of providers and give patients one access point to this information. Our aim was to report on the early effects of the EHR incentives on patient portal development by HIEs. Specifically, we describe the characteristics of these portals, identify factors affecting adoption by providers during the 2013-2014 time frame, and consider what may be the primary drivers of providers' adoption of patient portals in the future. METHODS: We identified four HIEs that were developing patient portals as of spring 2014. We collected relevant documents and conducted interviews with six HIE leaders as well as two providers that were implementing the portals in their practices. We performed content analysis on these data to extract information pertinent to our study objectives. RESULTS: Our findings suggest that there are two primary types of patient portals available to providers in HIEs: (1) portals linked to EHRs of individual providers or health systems and (2) HIE-sponsored portals that link information from multiple providers' EHRs. The decision of providers in the HIEs to adopt either one of these portals appears to be a trade-off between functionality, connectivity, and cost. Our findings also suggest that while the EHR Incentive Program is influencing these decisions, it may not be enough to drive adoption. Rather, patient demand for access to patient portals will be necessary to achieve widespread portal adoption and realization of potential benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing patient value should be the main principle underlying policies intending to increase online patient engagement in the third stage of the EHR Incentive Program. We propose a number of features for the EHR Incentive Program that will enhance patient value and thereby support the growth and sustainability of patient portals provided by Health Information Exchanges.

Associations Between Lean IT Management and Financial Performance in US Hospitals.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To understand the relationship between Lean implementation in information technology (IT) departments and hospital performance, particularly with respect to operational and financial outcomes. METHODS: Primary data were sourced from 1222 hospitals that responded to the National Survey of Lean (NSL)/Transformational Performance Improvement, which was fielded to 4500 general medical-surgical hospitals across the United States. Secondary sources included hospital performance data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). We performed 2 sets of multivariable regressions using data gathered from US hospitals, linked to AHRQ and CMS performance outcomes. We examined 10 different outcomes measuring financial performance, quality of care, and patient experience, and their associations with Lean adoption within hospital IT departments. We then focused only on those hospitals that adopted Lean in IT to identify specific practices associated with performance. RESULTS: Controlling for other factors, adoption of Lean IT management was associated with lower length of stay ( b = -0.098, P = .018) and inpatient expense per discharge ( b = -0.112, P = .090). Specifically, use of visual management tools (eg, A3 storyboards, status sheets) was associated with lower adjusted inpatient expense per discharge ( b = -0.176, P = .034) and higher earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization margin ( b = 0.124, P = .042). Such tools were also associated with hospital participation in bundled payment programs (odds ratio = 2.326; P = .046; 95% confidence interval, 0.979-5.527) and percentage of net revenue paid on a shared risk basis ( b = 0.188, P = .031). CONCLUSIONS: Lean IT management was associated with positive financial performance, particularly with hospital participation in value-based payment. More detailed study is needed to understand other influential factors and types of work processes, activities, or mechanisms by which high-functioning IT can contribute to financial outcomes.

Expert-Identified Practices for Achieving Measurable Performance Improvements With Lean Implementation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the rapid spread of Lean management in health care, few organizations have achieved measurable overall performance improvements with Lean. What differentiates these organizations from those that struggle with realizing the potential benefits of Lean management is unclear. In this qualitative study we explore measuring the impact of Lean and the recommended practices for achieving measurable performance improvements with Lean in health care organizations. METHODS: Informed by preliminary quantitative results from analyses of high- and low-performing Lean hospitals, we conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with Lean health care experts on the Lean principles and practices associated with better performance. We conducted qualitative content analyses of the interview transcripts based on grounded theory and linking to core principles and practices of the Lean management system. RESULTS: The qualitative data revealed 3 categories of metrics for measuring the impact of Lean: currently used institutional measures, measures tailored to Lean initiatives, and population-level measures. Leadership engagement/commitment and clear organizational focus/prioritization/alignment had the highest weighted averages of success factors. The lack of these 2 factors had the highest weighted averages of biggest barriers for achieving measurable performance improvements with Lean implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Leadership engagement and organizational focus can facilitate achieving the organization's performance improvement goals, whereas their absence can considerably hinder performance improvement efforts. Many different approaches have been used to quantify the impact of Lean, but currently used institutional performance measures are preferred by the majority of Lean experts.

Transformational Performance Improvement: Why Is Progress so Slow?

In this chapter, we identify three distinct transformational performance improvement (TPI) approaches commonly used to redesign work processes in health care organizations. We describe the unique components or tools that each approach uses to improve the delivery of health services. We also summarize what is empirically known about the effectiveness of each TPI approach according to systematic reviews and recent studies published in the peer-reviewed literature. Based on examination of this research, we discuss what knowledge is still needed to strengthen the evidence for whole system transformation. This involves the use of conceptual frameworks to assess and guide implementation efforts, and facilitators and barriers to change as revealed in a recent evaluation of one major initiative, the Lean Enterprise Transformation (LET) at the Veterans Health Administration. The analysis suggests ways in which TPI facilitators can be developed and barriers reduced to improve the effectiveness and sustainability of quality initiatives. Finally, we discuss appropriate study designs to evaluate TPI interventions that may strengthen the evidence for their effectiveness in real world practice settings.

Examining the Relationship Between the Lean Management System and Quality Improvement Care Management Processes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The United States has an underperforming health care system on both cost and quality criteria in comparison with other developed countries. One approach to improving system performance on both cost and quality is to use the Lean Management System based on the Shingo principles originally developed by Toyota in Japan. Our objective was to examine the association between hospital use of the Lean Management System and evidence-based or recommended quality improvement care management processes. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of data from 223 hospitals that responded to both the 2017 National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems and the 2017 National Survey of Lean/Transformational Performance Improvement in Hospitals was conducted. RESULTS: Controlling for hospital organizational and market characteristics, the number of years using Lean was positively associated with use of electronic health record-based decision support, use of quality-focused information management, use of evidence-based guidelines, and support for care transitions at the P < .05 level. The degree of education and training in Lean methods and processes was also positively associated ( P < .05) with greater support for care transitions. The number of years using Lean was marginally associated with screening for clinical conditions at the P < .10 level. There was an unexpected negative association between education and training scores and screening for clinical conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Greater experience in using the Lean Management System is positively associated with several evidence-based and/or recommended quality improvement care management processes.

Lean Management and Breakthrough Performance Improvement in Health Care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Lean management in health care organizations attempts to empower staff to generate continuous improvement through incremental but regular improvements in work processes. However, because of the increasing pressure on health care organizations to substantially improve quality of care and patient outcomes while containing costs in the relatively short term, many health care leaders are looking for ways to achieve large breakthrough improvements in their organization's performance. The objective of this research is to understand whether and how Lean management can be used to achieve breakthrough improvements in performance. METHODS: This study used grounded theory and content analysis of in-depth, semistructured interviews with 10 nationally recognized experts in the use of Lean management in health care organizations. The 10 participants constitute a purposive sample of experts with in-depth understanding of the strengths and limitations of Lean management in health care organizations. RESULTS: Two out of 10 participants defined breakthrough improvement as a major change in a performance metric; 2 participants defined it as a fundamental redesign in a process or service; the remaining 6 participants defined breakthrough improvement as having both these characteristics. The extent to which participants believed Lean was an effective means for achieving breakthrough improvement in performance was related to how they defined breakthrough improvement. The 2 participants who defined breakthrough improvement as a significant change in a performance metric believed Lean methods alone were sufficient. The 2 participants who defined breakthrough improvement to be a fundamental redesign tended not to view Lean alone as an effective approach. Rather, they, and the 6 participants who defined breakthrough improvement as having both change-in-metric and process redesign characteristics, viewed human-centered design thinking as the primary or important complementary approach to achieving breakthrough improvement. Participants identified resources, culture change, and leadership commitment beyond what would be required to achieve incremental improvement as the main facilitators and barriers to achieving breakthrough improvements. CONCLUSION: This research reveals some differences in experts' definitions of breakthrough improvement, and illuminates the value of human-centered design thinking, alone or as a complement to Lean management, in achieving breakthrough improvement in health care organizations. Most of our expert participants agreed that supplementing Lean management methods with the contributions of innovation design and investing significant resources, strengthening the organizational culture to support the necessary changes, and providing stronger leadership commitment to the effort are important facilitators for achieving breakthroughs in organizational performance.