Six Sigma in Medicine - Method to improve quality control in hospitals

Hi,

I am new ath these excellent forums. I would like to know if Six Sigma is an adequate and adaptable method to improve quality control in hospitals. Also if this is the right forum to post or there is a more specific one.

Thank you

Welcome to the Cove

Many health care institutions are taking up the concepts of both Six Sigma and Lean in an attempt to improve the quality of service and patient care. My personal observation is many of these institutions are limiting themselves by requiring that the Change Agent first be a medical professional and then only secondarily a Quality professional.

They don't seem to recognize their prejudice against non-medically trained people serves to perpetuate many of the bad practices they seek to reform.

This is precisely the Forum to take up this question. Responses may be slow in coming over the weekend, but I predict this thread will pick up steam once folks come back to the Cove on Monday.

Wes,

Thanks for your reply. I do not think MD are biased against non-medical professionals. However, the concept of QC in medicine is quite new and is a very though one. The Six Sigma (SS) attractiveness to doctors is that in can be measured and in my opinion is far less subjetive that ECFQM or other methods.

Furthermore, MD are used to qualitative analysis and at least basic statistics. Furthermore oen limitation of hiring professional is the cost for non-profit organizations and the sensitive data that have to be scrutiniced.

I think this is a very useful forum

Regards,

Bangali said:

Wes,

Thanks for your reply. I do not think MD are biased against non-medical professionals. However, the concept of QC in medicine is quite new and is a very though one. The Six Sigma (SS) attractiveness to doctors is that in can be measured and in my opinion is far less subjetive that ECFQM or other methods.

Furthermore, MD are used to qualitative analysis and at least basic statistics. Furthermore oen limitation of hiring professional is the cost for non-profit organizations and the sensitive data that have to be scrutiniced.

I think this is a very useful forum
Regards,

Click to expand...

Sensitivity of data is a false issue. Every health care organization has clerk-level employees who take medical histories, financial histories, transcribe and file diagnostic test and treatment data every day. If they can be trusted with such sensitive information, so can Quality professionals.

Qualitative analysis is different from quantitative analysis, and I agree medical personnel deal with both, but that interaction really only applies to researchers, not clinical personnel. It is the clinical activity which is more sorely in need of quality improvement initiatives.

Quite frankly, cost, too, is a non-issue. One of the great Quality gurus, Phillip Crosby, was famous for proclaiming "Quality is free!" meaning that a properly applied quality program saves more than its initial cost by reducing scrap, error, and, especially in the case of medical errors, costly insurance premiums and lawsuit payouts when egregious errors are detected.

It has often been said, "A dog can't serve two masters!" this may also be the case when medical personnel are asked to divide their time between straight clinical work and developing and maintaining a quality management program. More reason for hiring dedicated Quality management personnel.

Let's see what others have to say as the week progresses.

Bangali said:

Furthermore, one limitation of hiring (quality) professionals is the cost for non-profit organizations and the sensitive data that has to be scrutinized.

Click to expand...

To date, 3000+ USA hospitals have signed on to the 100,000 Lives Program, which is intended to significantly reduce the estimated 93,000 people who are KILLED each year due to medical ERRORS.

I think saving even a few lives would easily save enough money to pay for some quality specialists, as well as a handful of good consultants.

It is something I am working on personally.

Bangali said:

Hi,

I am new ath these excellent forums. I would like to know if Six Sigma is an adequate and adaptable method to improve quality control in hospitals. Also if this is the right forum to post or there is a more specific one.

Thank you

Click to expand...

I would recommend beginning with ISO 9001 and Baldrige, and moving to Six Sigma when the lower hanging fruit has been harvested. Six Sigma brings a lot of heavy time constraints which will cause a lot of resistance in time-constrained hospitals.

In addition to information you may obtain here in the Cove, you may also find benefit from FREE registration at the Institute for Healthcare Improvement website where I have been registered for about two years (http://www.ihi.org/)

Bangali said:

Wes,

Thanks for your reply. I do not think MD are biased against non-medical professionals. However, the concept of QC in medicine is quite new and is a very though one. The Six Sigma (SS) attractiveness to doctors is that in can be measured and in my opinion is far less subjetive that ECFQM or other methods.

Furthermore, MD are used to qualitative analysis and at least basic statistics. Furthermore oen limitation of hiring professional is the cost for non-profit organizations and the sensitive data that have to be scrutiniced.

I think this is a very useful forum

Regards,

Click to expand...

Here, I frequently view advertisements for quality professionals in medical organizations requiring at least a Bachelors in nursing or Registered Nurse.

Banks are another arena where industry insiders are usually called for in quality personnel.

I used to feel worse about that than I do now, after having reflected for awhile on how industry specific some manufacturing quality skills appear to the unskilled eye and how seldom the essential quality theories are taught in schools.

All the same, I recently applied for Training Manager positions at banks and medical groups, and also Quality Director at a small hospital; the only times I have not seen specific requirements for medical experience for positions I could perform well in. We will see if I made it past the gatekeepers...:

Jennifer Kirley said:

Here, I frequently view advertisements for quality professionals in medical organizations requiring at least a Bachelors in nursing or Registered Nurse.

Banks are another arena where industry insiders are usually called for in quality personnel.

I used to feel worse about that than I do now, after having reflected for awhile on how industry specific some manufacturing quality skills appear to the unskilled eye and how seldom the essential quality theories are taught in schools.

All the same, I recently applied for Training Manager positions at banks and medical groups, and also Quality Director at a small hospital; the only times I have not seen specific requirements for medical experience for positions I could perform well in. We will see if I made it past the gatekeepers...:

Click to expand...

It doesn't SEEM fair, but part of the technique of getting past "gatekeepers" is overcoming bias and ignorance. The situation is not limited to banking or healthcare. Automotive companies want "Q folk" with industry experience as if someone who had brought a company through ISO 9001 or ISO 13485 could NOT POSSIBLY understand the intricacies of TS16949. The same thing works in reverse, of course, in that candidates unnecessarily limit their job hunt to industries (or geographic areas, or company size, etc.) where the candidate already has experience.

When I trained sales people, I often told them the "toughest door to get past was their own front door in the morning." This advice has not grown stale with age. Candidates have to eliminate their own bias and fear as well as finding a way to offset the bias and fear of a prospective employer.

I don't mean to be glib or make this sound simple, because it isn't. Candidates have to become sales people and sell the BENEFIT for the employer of taking the candidate as an employee. I'm sorry I don't have a one-size-fits-all formula for doing this. I do know the keys are involved with understanding (divining?) the problems faced by the employer and convincing the employer the candidate has an affordable, do-able solution. Part of that is showing how past candidate successes can transfer to the employer's situation and work for that employer!

The cover letter a candidate sends to an employer is crucial and worth tens of thousands of dollars in compensation. It makes sense to spend time and effort in creating that letter to entice the employer who is going to pay that compensation.

Ah yes, all very good advice Wes, as always.

But indeed, knowing exactly how to form the message is the toughest part. It becomes more complex considering how people vary.

That's why I have focused my study on HR subjects, including how HR computes value and measures results. I believe I am homing in on my target, communicating the specifics of what I do in a way they will be attracted to. It doesn't happen right away.

Still, I have read more than one article advising job seekers to "Don't bother the HR Representative" unless one's qualifications match the called out requisites.

For example, if an ad says "Six Sigma Black Belt Certification required" or "RN or Bachelors in Nursing required" how might one sell a CQE instead? I've been wanting to ask you this specific thing.