Newsletter Registration

Signup for our Quarterly eZine: Healthcare Collaboration for Your Success and receive our free report: 10 Steps We Can Take NOW to Engage Healthcare Professionals and Improve Care

View Ken Cohn's profile on LinkedIn

Collaborative Flow

February 24th, 2008 by Ken Cohn

I want to bring readers’ attention to a well-written book that has implications for all of us who are passionate about collaboration, Leadership for Smooth Patient Flow, by Jensen, Mayer, Welch, and Haraden; Health Administration Press, (http://www.ache.org/pubs/redesign/productcatalog.cfm?pc=WWW1-2073. Also available at  http://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Smooth-Patient-Flow-Jensen/dp/1567932657/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203717356&sr=8-1.)

The authors discuss six dimensions of flow:

  • Efficiency:
    • it is not just the quantity of time, but also how providers spend their time
    • they point out the importance of doing fast things (non-value added tasks or routine, automated tasks) quickly and slow things slowly
  • Decreased variation:
    • especially artificial variation that arises from personal preferences not supported by evidence
    • the other important source of variation to treat is variation in outcomes due to differing ability to diagnose and treat patients, which should be treated with education rather than punishment
  • Systems thinking:
    • based on understanding the interconnectedness of processes, people, and transfers between stakeholders in the patient’s healthcare journey
    • this understanding requires seeing processes of change as moving pictures rather than as still photos
  • Empowerment:
    • involves making sure that professionals at the front-line of care have the freedom (and responsibility) to adapt service to meet patient needs in real time
    • The operational question is, “Tell me about a time that you broke the rules on behalf of a patient.”
  • Matching capacity to service demand:
    • service opportunity, once lost, is lost forever
    • decisions about staffing need to be made considering peak demand and not just “average” demand
  • Creativity:
    Smooth flow creates an environment of communication, predictability, and reliability that makes patients and families perceive the medical care setting as safe and caring.  Thus, flow is an opportunity for healthcare settings to improve their service and care outcomes.
    Berwick states that every system is perfectly designed to achieve the results it achieves (Br. Med J 1996;312(7031):619-22.  What are your thoughts:
  • Do we enable inefficient and ineffective systems for moving patients through their care experience?
  • What changes are happening around the country (world) that improve patient flow

I welcome your input.

 Kenneth H. Cohn
www.healthcarecollaboration.com

Comments

Comment from Ian Furst
Time: February 28, 2008, 11:59 pm

I absolutely agree that we enable inefficient systems in our clinics. I think that one of the problems of applying som of the standard queue models is that the natural variation in our systems is quite high and not always easy to control because of the nature of illness. To make use of the data to change capacity. I don’t agree that you should match capacity to peak demand due to cost (although it would be nice). Rather I think we need to make capacity flexible enough that large variations in demand can be accomidated. It’s not ideal but it is more cost effective. As an example, we have four clinics and watch the demand of patients being referred. “doctor days” are moved from one clinic to another to match demand. No office is staffed for peak or average, rather the system is built for flexability. If you get a chance please check my blog and if you feel appropriate could you link it? thx.
http://www.waittimes.blogspot.com

Pingback from Collaborative Bidding
Time: April 15, 2008, 12:07 pm

[...] In a previous post, “Collaborative Error: The Day I Nearly Quit“, I wrote that the old paradigm of physicians and nurses taking care of clinical dimensions of care and administrators keeping finance and operations to themselves does not work any more.  The decision not to reimburse for never events, such as wrong-site surgery, falls, hospital-acquired infections, and bed-sores acquired during a hospital stay requires a collaborative effort among clinical, administrative, and board team members.  So does improving patient flow, as discussed in “Collaborative Flow.” [...]

Write a comment