You have accessJournal of UrologyGeneral & Epidemiological Trends & Socioeconomics: Practice Patterns, Cost Effectiveness1 Apr 201184 LEAN TECHNOLOGY IMPROVES EFFICIENCY IN OUTPATIENT ACADEMIC URO-ONCOLOGY CLINICS Sean Skeldon, Andrea Simmons, Bob Broach, Karen Hersey, Michael Jewett, Antonio Finelli, Alexandre Zlotta, and Neil Fleshner Sean SkeldonSean Skeldon Toronto, Canada More articles by this author , Andrea SimmonsAndrea Simmons Toronto, Canada More articles by this author , Bob BroachBob Broach Zionsville, IN More articles by this author , Karen HerseyKaren Hersey Toronto, Canada More articles by this author , Michael JewettMichael Jewett Toronto, Canada More articles by this author , Antonio FinelliAntonio Finelli Toronto, Canada More articles by this author , Alexandre ZlottaAlexandre Zlotta Toronto, Canada More articles by this author , and Neil FleshnerNeil Fleshner Toronto, Canada More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.02.148AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Due to high clinic volumes and variability among patient needs, conducting an efficient and streamlined uro-oncology clinic can be challenging. Academic urology clinics pose additional challenges including: teaching (medical students, residents and fellows), clinical trial coordination and formalized biobanking. Lean technology is an industrial engineering tool developed to optimize manufacturing efficiency and has been successfully applied in the health care setting. We set out to determine if Lean methods could improve efficiencies and quality of care among a hospital-based high volume uro-oncology clinic. METHODS Prior to the Lean initiative, baseline data were collected around patient volumes, wait times, cycle times (patient arrival to discharge), nursing assessment time, patient teaching and physician ergonomics (via spaghetti diagram). Value stream analysis (VSA) and a Rapid Improvement Event (RIE) were carried out and significant changes were made to patient check in, work areas and nursing face time. Follow-up data were obtained at 30, 60 and 90 days. Changes from baseline were compared to baseline with probability values less than 0.05 deemed significant. RESULTS Table 1 demonstrates the improvements seen following the VSA and RIE. Figures 1 and 2 show spaghetti diagrams depicting physician and nurse flow prior to and after the RIE. Table 1. Improvement from baseline following Rapid Improvement Event Baseline 30 days 60 days 90 days Average Number of Patients per Clinic 30.4 32.1 32.6 31.2 Median Cycle Time (min) 46 43 31⁎ n/a Wait Time for Initial Assessment (min) 23 5⁎ 10⁎ 5⁎ RN Quick Assessment (min) 0.5 15⁎ 5⁎ 5⁎ RN Teaching (min) 2 n/a 15⁎ 10⁎ Wait Time for Clinical Trial Coordinators (min) 26 18⁎ 6⁎ n/a ⁎ p < 0.05 compared to baseline CONCLUSIONS Using Lean methodology we were able to significantly shorten the patient cycle time and time to initial assessment as well as integrate both an initial RN assessment and RN teaching to each visit. Lean Technology can effectively be applied to improve efficiency and patient care in an academic outpatient uro-oncology clinic setting. © 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 185Issue 4SApril 2011Page: e36-e37 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Sean Skeldon Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Andrea Simmons Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Bob Broach Zionsville, IN More articles by this author Karen Hersey Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Michael Jewett Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Antonio Finelli Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Alexandre Zlotta Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Neil Fleshner Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...