Lean in Healthcare...again.
Just after publishing yesterday's post I came across an article on the 'net version of NYT. I think you have to be registered to get on the NYT site, but it's free. The title of the article is "In Hospitals, Simple Reminders Reduce Deadly Infections". Do a search and see if you can get to it.
The article never makes reference to "lean methods" or anything like them but reports on a couple of methods being used Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center in Brooklyn.
Here are a couple of excerpts (I'm hoping this falls under "fair use" doctrine):
"Timeouts to wash hands and put on hairnets, a simple checklist to ensure that such seemingly obvious precautions are done, and advertising campaigns directed at everyone from the most senior doctors to the poorest of patients have been credited with drastically reducing the number of serious infections at New York City’s public hospitals."
"In late 2005, the city’s Health and Hospitals Corporation adopted a series of simple, standardized protocols based on those developed by Dr. Peter J. Pronovost, a crusader against preventable hospital deaths and a professor of anesthesiology and critical care medicine at Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Pronovost calls his protocols a checklist, and that is pretty much what they are."
"One person, usually a nurse, acts as the referee by calling, “Timeout!” and checking off the “completed” or “not completed” columns on the list as each step is called out and performed."
It's a great story and an interesting read.
And it provides support both to those who feel that lean methods have a place in health care and folks (like me) who agree that they have a place but don't need to have a name (lean or otherwise) to go with them.
My problem with labeling methods or programs as being "lean" methods seems to imply that they are special and unique and available only to those well versed in the whole field of lean concept and practice and who know the jargon. As the article implies, lean and agile practice is no more difficult than making a list and checking it twice.
The article never makes reference to "lean methods" or anything like them but reports on a couple of methods being used Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center in Brooklyn.
Here are a couple of excerpts (I'm hoping this falls under "fair use" doctrine):
"Timeouts to wash hands and put on hairnets, a simple checklist to ensure that such seemingly obvious precautions are done, and advertising campaigns directed at everyone from the most senior doctors to the poorest of patients have been credited with drastically reducing the number of serious infections at New York City’s public hospitals."
"In late 2005, the city’s Health and Hospitals Corporation adopted a series of simple, standardized protocols based on those developed by Dr. Peter J. Pronovost, a crusader against preventable hospital deaths and a professor of anesthesiology and critical care medicine at Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Pronovost calls his protocols a checklist, and that is pretty much what they are."
"One person, usually a nurse, acts as the referee by calling, “Timeout!” and checking off the “completed” or “not completed” columns on the list as each step is called out and performed."
It's a great story and an interesting read.
And it provides support both to those who feel that lean methods have a place in health care and folks (like me) who agree that they have a place but don't need to have a name (lean or otherwise) to go with them.
My problem with labeling methods or programs as being "lean" methods seems to imply that they are special and unique and available only to those well versed in the whole field of lean concept and practice and who know the jargon. As the article implies, lean and agile practice is no more difficult than making a list and checking it twice.
Comments