1 Process Improvement Team Operating Room Scheduling Final Report Respectfully Submitted to the OR Committee May 1, 2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MCIC Perioperative Initiative February 14, 2006 Operating Room Briefings.
Advertisements

New GSMP Governance Proposal (This recommendation provides the governance approach for the standards development only) ISDP Governance Team 2-September-2009.
Procedures for ESEA Consolidated Monitoring Effective July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2014 Monitoring For Results.
Care Coordinator Roles and Responsibilities
The Holland Centre – PROVINCIAL CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE On behalf of the Holland Centre Interprofessional Team – February 6 th, 2013.
Global Congress Global Leadership Vision for Project Management.
Knowledge Management, Texas-style Session 508. Presented by: Belinda Perez Stephanie Moorer Knowledge Management, Texas-Style.
Second Independent Evaluation Roles / Responsibilities & Relationships.
1 LBNL Enterprise Computing (EC) January 2003 LBNL Enterprise Computing.
Mission Bay Operations Planning Update for Clinical Affairs Committee June 22, 2011.
By Saurabh Sardesai October 2014.
Center for Health Care Quality Licensing & Certification Program Evaluation 1 August 2014 rev.
Purpose of the Standards
INITIATING DISCHARGE PLANNING PRIOR TO ADMISSION Start Date: October 5, 2012 Report Date: April 5, 2013 Executive Sponsors: David Mountjoy, Dennis McGowan,
© 2008 Prentice Hall11-1 Introduction to Project Management Chapter 11 Managing Project Execution Information Systems Project Management: A Process and.
Project Execution.
PERFORMANCE AUDIT REPORT ON MANAGEMENT OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE (A CASE STUDY ON HEALTH CENTERS) 8/16/20151 Dr. Anna Nswilla CDHSMoHSW.
Release & Deployment ITIL Version 3
Chapter 8: Quantitatve Methods in Health Care Management Yasar A. Ozcan 1 Chapter 8. Scheduling.
An Anaesthetist’s perspective on Same Day Surgery
Revenue Cycle Management Medical Technology Acquisition and Assessment Team Members: Joseph Dixon, Michael Morotti, Mari Pirie-St. Pierre, David Robbins.
3 Dec 2003Market Operations Standing Committee1 Market Rule and Change Management Consultation Process John MacKenzie / Darren Finkbeiner / Ella Kokotsis,
TAC July 2, 2003 Market Design Implementation Process Recommendation.
Morning Briefings and Huddles
Project Initiation Document (PID) Strategic Plan PID Committee Meeting - November 5, 2012.
OPERATING ROOM DASHBOARD Virginia Chard, RN, BSN, CNOR
Implementing universal Lynch Syndrome screening in a large healthcare system.
Learning Objectives 2 2 Explain the role of the senior executive in addressing technical and adaptive work Identify characteristics to search for when.
How to Get Started with JCI Accreditation. 2 The Accreditation Journey: General Suggestions The importance of leadership commitment: Board, CEO, and clinical.
Lecture 11 Managing Project Execution. Project Execution The phase of a project in which work towards direct achievement of the project’s objectives and.
SacProNet An Overview of Project Management Techniques.
Implementing QI Projects Title I HIV Quality Management Program Case Management Providers Meeting May 26, 2005 Presented by Lynda A. O’Hanlon Title I HIV.
Financial Systems Needs Assessment Administrator Briefing Spring Quarter 2009.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA Outline LEARNING OBJECTIVES REVIEW TEAM AND COUNTERPARTS Team Composition Qualification PREPARATORY PHASE.
MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1.Organizational Structure B2.Standards Development: Roles and Responsibilities B3.Conformity Assessment: Roles and Responsibilities.
© The Johns Hopkins University and The Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation, 2012 Optional SUSP Tools: Briefing Audits, Morning Huddle, and Shadowing.
PERI-OP GOVERNING COUNCIL ST. LUKE’S HOSPITAL CEDAR RAPIDS IHS Leadership Symposium April 17, 2012.
Implementation Strategy July 2002 STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT LIFECYCLE PROCESS ORP Publishes & Maintains 8 Standing Committee Recommends Approval / Disapproval.
Project Portfolio Management Business Priorities Presentation.
Presented by: Jan Stanley, State Title I Director Office of Assessment and Accountability June 10, 2008 Monitoring For Results.
TEXAS NODAL: THE BASICS Presentation to ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee Workgroup June 25, 2003.
The partnership principle and the European Code of Conduct on Partnership.
FINAL PRESENTATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR AND ANALYSIS Prepared for : Dr. S. Kumar Group : Dollar 2 A. R. S. BANDARA - PGIA / 06 / 6317 B. A. G. K.
Final Report Briefing Retained Foreign Object Performance Improvement Team Presented April 3, 2007.
VA Indian Health Service BCMA Effort Chris L. Tucker Director, Bar Code Resource Office VHA OIA, Health Informatics.
Module 5 Session 5.2 Visual 1 Module 5 Refining Objectives, Scope, and Other Project Parameters Session 5.2 Reviewing the PAR and refining key project.
Decision Making Process Program Planning and Control Deana Hackfeld Management Systems Office November 17, 2006.
EMS Technical Assessments for Critical Access Hospital Communities Mary Sheridan ORHP Grantee Partnership Meeting September 1, 2009 …improving access to.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA Outline LEARNING OBJECTIVES REVIEW TEAM AMD COUNTERPARTS Team Composition Qualification PREPARATORY PHASE.
October 25,  Benefit Year Earnings (BYE): Root Causes Identified:  Agency Causes  Staff fails to follow-up with claimant at the time continued.
TEXAS NODAL Market Design Structure and Process August 19, 2003.
Faculty Meeting Review Group Alvan Bregman (convener), Lisa Hinchliffe, Joanne Kaczmarek.
Washington Traffic Records Committee Creating & Coordinating a Shared Vision for Traffic Records 2006 Traffic Records Forum August 1, 2006.
Section 4.9 Work Group Members Kris Hafner, Chair, Board Member Rob Kondziolka, MAC Chair Maury Galbraith, WIRAB Shelley Longmuir, Governance Committee.
Transmission Advisory Group NCTPC Process Update Rich Wodyka September 7, 2006.
Bill Nicklay Michele Balding Tiffany Brufladt THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LEAN WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEALTH SYSTEM.
IRB Presentation to the Pediatric Ethics Subcommittee of the FDA regarding “Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) Agonist Test in Disorders of Puberty”
1 North Carolina Transmission Planning Collaborative Overview Clay Norris, Chair OSC October 5, 2005.
Diane Trimble, MSN, RN-BC Saint Luke’s Health System.
TEXAS NODAL (ERCOT REVISIONS)
BREAST CANCER ONCOLOGY NAVIGATION SERVICE
Coordination (benign lesions)
Implementation Strategy July 2002
Establish a Pre-consultation Process
Project Initiatives Identified by the CIA Project
Course, Curriculum and Catalog Management: Update
[INSERT APPLICABLE REGIONAL ENTITY NAME/LOGO]
Roles and Responsibilities
Presentation transcript:

1 Process Improvement Team Operating Room Scheduling Final Report Respectfully Submitted to the OR Committee May 1, 2007

2 Team Leader Stephanie Ramirez Participating Team Members Dr. Greg ReeceMelina Scarborough Dr. V. GottumukkalaLancelot Jones Patricia GageNancy Reinert Susan McConihay Keith Shook Anthony HoangIrvin Serra Carla Willis Corliss Denman Shirley MorrisonMelanie Lopresto Stacy SwansonGarry Brydges Mark Winograd Technical Consultant Jim Vinci, Holland and Davis, LLP

3 GOAL: To increase efficiency and accuracy of the Operating Rooms through an effective and “rules based” scheduling system.

4  OR Committee reviews the Team’s recommended solutions and approve with an addendum if necessary.  Forward recommended solutions & final report to OR Executive Team for approval.  Charter the Implementation Planning Team (action for OR Executive Team). Requests the following:

5 Overview  Team representative of all stakeholders  Conducted Root Cause Analysis  Problems identified: Communication Staffing Information Technology Cultural/Behavioral

6 MAJOR FINDINGS: 1. Failure to take advantage of web-based technology & electronic enhancements. 2. Inadequate structure leading to inefficiency & lack of standardization in scheduling processes. 3. Unpredictability of over & under utilization of OR resources. 4. Inability to track patients thru scheduling process to point of medical clearance. 5. Challenges of complex & multi-team cases.

7 MAJOR FINDINGS: 1.Failure to take advantage of web-based technology & electronic enhancements. Solution  Implementation of web based & electronic processes are indicated throughout presentation.

8 Inefficiencies in inconsistent processes affect everyone.

9 MAJOR FINDINGS: 1. Failure to take advantage of web-based technology & electronic enhancements. 2. Inadequate structure leading to inefficiency & lack of standardization in scheduling processes. 3. Unpredictability of over & under utilization of OR resources. 4. Inability to track patients thru scheduling process to point of medical clearance. 5. Challenges of complex & multi-team cases.

10 MAJOR FINDING: 2.Inadequate structure leading to inefficiency & lack of standardization in scheduling processes. Short-term Solution (3-6 months)  Use this ordered set of priorities to schedule cases:  Patient Safety  Maximize OR efficiency  Reduce patient waiting time  Surgeon preference Dexter et. al. Making Management Decisions on the Day of Surgery Based on Operating Room Efficiency and Patient Waiting Times, Dexter et. al. Anesthesiology 2004;

11 Short-term Solution (3-6 months)  Assign scheduled cases based on principles of efficiency:  Assign by historical case length.  Assess OR resources and match case length.  Consider equipment restrictions when assigning operating rooms.  Arrange cases to maximize OR efficiency (bin stacking) to optimize available resources (minimizing over utilization).

12 Short-term Solution (3-6 months)  Ensure patient safety through adequate preparation for cases:  Finalize schedule by specific time (to be determined) before day of surgery.  Avoid posting simultaneous case starts in ACB & OR on a single day.  Avoid replacing cancelled cases with new cases in the 24 hrs prior to the day of surgery (excluding urgent/emergent).

13 MAJOR FINDINGS: 1. Failure to take advantage of web-based technology & electronic enhancements. 2. Inadequate structure leading to inefficiency & lack of standardization in scheduling processes. 3. Unpredictability of over & under utilization of OR resources. 4. Inability to track patients thru scheduling process to point of medical clearance. 5. Challenges of complex & multi-team cases.

14 MAJOR FINDING: 3.Unpredictability of over & under utilization of OR resources. Short-term Solution (3-6 months)  Assign a scheduler to each Alkek quad & ACB to schedule cases/assign rooms using the nurse manager as a resource.

15 Recommended Structure for Surgery Scheduling 17 Scheduler reviews request in surgery scheduling queue (w) OR scheduler Nadine Robotics Gyn Urology Thoracic Pediatrics 3 Surgical Oncology OR scheduler Michelle 2 Neuro Ortho Pain OR scheduler Elena4 H & N Opthalmology / ENT Dental Oncology Plastic Surgery OR scheduler Paula1 ACB OR OR scheduler Matt5

16 Short-term Solutions (3-6 months)  Assess allocation of time by services.  Assess opportunity to post cases with defined allocated time parameters.  Use historical data to:  Estimate case duration for scheduling.  Validate service allocation utilization & duration with upper prediction bounds.

17 Short-term Solutions (3-6 months)  Identify a representative (Chair or designee) from each Service to assist with resolving conflicts in case scheduling.  Assess opportunity to identify coordinator in each Service to work with surgeon and PA to coordinate scheduling of cases.  Establish oversight process to review service allocation utilization quarterly.  Modify service allocations based on review findings.

18 MAJOR FINDINGS: 1. Failure to take advantage of web-based technology & electronic enhancements. 2. Inadequate structure leading to inefficiency & lack of standardization in scheduling processes. 3. Unpredictability of over & under utilization of OR resources. 4. Inability to track patients thru scheduling process to point of medical clearance. 5. Challenges of complex & multi-team cases.

19 MAJOR FINDING: 4.Inability to track patients thru scheduling process to point of medical clearance. Intermediate Solution (6-12 months)  Enhance current IT systems to improve patient flow, communication, and patient preparation.  Collaborate with IT & PI to develop electronic and web-based systems (white board subprocess) with business rules for accurate tracking of patients and extraction of data

20 MAJOR FINDINGS: 1. Failure to take advantage of web-based technology & electronic enhancements. 2. Inadequate structure leading to inefficiency & lack of standardization in scheduling processes. 3. Unpredictability of over & under utilization of OR resources. 4. Inability to track patients thru scheduling process to point of medical clearance. 5. Challenges of complex & multi-team cases.

21 MAJOR FINDINGS: 5.Challenges of complex & multi-team cases. Short/Intermediate Solution (Timeline as indicated) (3-6 months)  Develop a centralized “time away” calendar to improve process of scheduling multi-team cases. (3-6 months) (6-12 months)  Automate process to notify stakeholders and collect data regarding a change or cancellation of case. (6-12 months)

22 Recommended Implementation Team

23 New Surgery Process Emergent/Urgent: Patient Safety White Board: Patient Safety Single & Multidisciplinary Scheduling: Patient Safety Maximize OR Efficiency  OR throughput Scheduling queue to OR Manager: Maximize OR efficiency  OR throughput  Patient waiting time Surgeon preference Final Schedule & Add On Cases: Patient safety Maximize OR efficiency Patient waiting time Surgeon preference

24 Comments, Suggestions, Discussion