implementing rapid real-time process “defect” collection to optimize anatomic pathology...
TRANSCRIPT
Implementing Rapid Real-time Process “Defect” Collection to Optimize Anatomic Pathology Workflow: A two pronged approach Based on End-User Work Setting
Michael Riben, MD1,Leslie Nesbitt,1Shibu Ninan3,Mark J. Routbort, MD, PhD2
Departments of (1) Pathology and (2) Hematopathology, and the (3) Section of clinical Laboratory Informatics, Division of Pathology and
Laboratory Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston, TX
Context - Background
Our workflow optimization project leverages manufacturing based quality improvement methods, such as Lean and Six Sigma, which strive for zero “defects” as a measure of quality.
We have implemented a change management infrastructure that utilizes data collection and analysis to aid decision making
Context: Background
In order to analyze the type and kind of defects occurring in our workflows, we strove to implement a “defect reporting system” that would fit into the entire staff’s workflow for real time collection, whether they worked at a workstation that included a computer, or not.
Definition of Defect: a flaw, an imperfection, or a deficiency in specimen
processing that requires us to delay or stop our work or return work to the sender. We interpreted this definition to apply to all aspects of case
workflow Types of waste included process flaws associated with
overproduction, time waiting, transportation, processing, stock on hand, movement, defective products, dictation problems, etc…
Measures of Process Defects and Waste in Surgical Pathology as a basis for Quality Improvement InitiativesRichard J. Zarbo, MD, DMD and Rita D'Angelo, MS, ASQE, SSBBAm J Clin Pathol 2007;128:423-429.
Criteria for a optimal Defect Reporting System:
Easy to use Real-time data capture Equal access to all Standardized Menu-drive Defect capture closest to
discovery
Visual presentation and public exposure
Blameless participation Compliance with
participation Reusability.
Measures of Process Defects and Waste in Surgical Pathology as a basis for Quality Improvement Initiatives, Richard J. Zarbo, MD, DMD and Rita D'Angelo, MS, ASQE, SSBB Am J Clin Pathol 2007;128:423-429.
The Visual Data Displays
❚Image 1 Visual data display poster showing data entries by❚pathologists that captured detail on misidentifications arisingin the surgical pathology process.
Measures of Process Defects and Waste in Surgical Pathology as a basis for Quality Improvement InitiativesRichard J. Zarbo, MD, DMD and Rita D'Angelo, MS, ASQE, SSBBAm J Clin Pathol 2007;128:423-429.
What walls?
What Walls?
Technology:
We utilized paper-based customized Post-it® (3M) notes with a 4 quadrant design, and developed a custom data entry form in PathStation, our VB.Net/SQL based workflow integration software application. (previously described)
Design A coded defect classification and location/process list was developed and
distributed to all employees. The data collection event lasted for 12 working days. For non-computer based workstations, defects were captured in real-time using
the custom designed Post-it notes using the coded choices Completed Post-it® notes were posted in each lab at designated “ wall” locations. We did not have space for Visual Data Displays, described by D’angelo et al due to
space constraints. Notes were collected every other day for data entry into the electronic module.
Running totals were reported back to each area on an ongoing basis For computer based settings, an integrated “defect” collection module
automatically set user context, case context, date/time, user location, and utilized an identical defect classification. A running total was always visible in the module. All entered defects were visible and sortable on a display tab. Ultimately, all defects were recorded into the electronic module to facilitate visibility to
the widest possible audience and allow for data analysis.
Process for Non-computer based workstations
The “analog” process
Distributed Defect Codes and Locations
Custom Post-it®
Analog Visual Displays
Providing Feedback Sample of
Posters placed in all areas with running totals
PathStation Defect Reporting Module
The Electronic Process
PathStation access
Added button to the main tab of Pathstation
Electronic Defect Reporting Module
Electronic – Case/Patient Context Set.
the Submit – View Process Defects form will open with the <CaseNumber> field auto populated.
Indicating where the defect occurred
To indicate the location where the defect or process has occurred click on the dropdown arrow to the left of the <Defect/Process Location> field and select a location. Location codes are grouped by major areas. Note this is not the location documented. We automatically set this by where PC device name and known location for all PC’s,
Selecting a Defect code
Defect codes are grouped by asset or process.
Selecting a Defect code
Defect codes are grouped by asset or process.
Adding comments
Submitting a defect
Viewing the defects
Running total of defects and details
The defects are listed in a table view with sortable columns.
Results
A total of 1291 defects were detected over a 12 consecutive reporting work days 917 unique cases
“Nesbitt” Classification
Group Defects
Communication 76
Hardware 11
Identification 349
Procedural 430
Software 4
Technical 315
Tracking 71
“Nesbitt” Classification
76
11
349
430
4
315
71
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Communication
Hardware
Identification
Procedural
Software
Technical
Tracking
Defects by Case Type
33
1
53
413
70
89
370
7
136
378
17
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1
Bone MarrowBone Marrow ReferralDeep FNAEndo FNAGynNon-GynOutside ConsultationOutside ReferralSup FNASurgical BiopsySurgical CaseUS FNA
Defect Occurrence
4
77
321
133
264
52
20
300
119
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Defect Occurrence
Autopsy
Cyto
External
Faculty
Fellows
HemPath
Other
Path
Support Services
Warehouse
Where Defects Reported
12978
5
94
261
724
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Reporting Location
Cyto
Faculty
Fellows
HemPath
Path
Support Services
Conclusions
The ability to document “defects” in real-time enhances reporting opportunities and increases compliance with data gathering events, critical to designing improvements that optimize efficiency and quality.
We demonstrate the ability to document the defect identified in less than 5 seconds in settings with, and without, a computer workstation.
Next Steps
Implement Workflow changes Re-collect defects Compare defect capture before and after
workflow optimization