Rapid Process Optimization

A Systematic Review on Lean Applications' in Emergency Departments

This article presents the state of the art of Lean principles applied in Emergency Departments through a systematic literature review. Our article extends previous work found in the literature to respond to the following questions: (i) What research problems in emergency departments can Lean principles help overcome? (ii) What Lean approaches and tools are used most often in this environment? (iii) What are the results and benefits obtained by these practices? and (iv) What research opportunities appear as gaps in the current state of the art on the subject? A six-step systematic review was performed following the guidance of the PRISMA method. The review analysis identified six main research problems where Lean was applied in Emergency Departments: (i) High Waiting Time and High Length of Hospital Stay; (ii) Health Safety; (iii) Process redesign; (iv) Management and Lessons Learned; (v) High Patient Flow; (vi) Cost Analysis. The six research problems’ main approaches identified were Lean Thinking, Multidisciplinary, Statistics, and Six Sigma. The leading Lean tools and methodologies were VSM, Teamwork, DMAIC, and Kaizen. The main benefits of applying Lean Principles were (a) reductions in waiting time, costs, length of hospital stay, patient flow, and procedure times; and (b) improvements in patient satisfaction, efficiency, productivity, standardization, relationships, safety, quality, and cost savings. Multidisciplinary integration of managers and work teams often yields good results. Finally, this study identifies knowledge gaps and new opportunities to study Lean best practices in healthcare organizations.

Effects of Lean Healthcare on Patient Flow: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of lean healthcare (LH) on patient flow in ambulatory care and determine whether waiting time and length of stay (LOS) decrease after LH interventions.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed with close adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We searched for studies of healthcare organizations applying LH interventions within ambulatory care published between 2002 and 2018. Six databases and grey literature sources were used. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed each study. When consensus was difficult to reach, a third reviewer intervened. Finally, a summary of findings was generated.

RESULTS

Out of 5627 studies, 40 were included. Regarding LOS for all patients, 19 out of 22 studies reported a decrease. LOS for discharged patients decreased in 11 out of 13 studies, whereas LOS for admitted patients was reduced in 6 out of 7 studies. Waiting time for patients before seeing a healthcare professional decreased in 24 out of 26 studies. Waiting time to treatment and waiting time for appointments were minimized in 4 and 2 studies, respectively. Patients who left without being seen by a doctor decreased in 9 out of 12 studies. Finally, patient and staff satisfaction were measured in 8 and 2 studies, respectively, with each reporting improvements.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our findings, LH helped to reduce waiting time and LOS in ambulatory care, mainly owing to its focus on identifying and minimizing non-value added (NVA) activities. Nevertheless, evidence of the impact of LH on patient/staff satisfaction and the translation of the obtained benefits into savings is scarce among studies.