The most striking results were the process times, and how they informed the management options. For example, for the lowest severity patients, the median time spent in Resource Center A was 276 minutes. The average was well over twice that (not surprisingly). The median times for the all other severities was consistently in the 4 to 5 hour range. Sensitivity analyses and other calculations showed that the distributions were not driven by a few 'outliers' but represented true bottlenecks. That's where the CXOs can determine is a patient flow system is the solution to overcrowding, or some other fixed resource constraint is driving the system behavior. To Julie's point, in the later case, a patient flow system wont change throughput. The complete model, populated graphically with the process data and management actions is here:
The work described above was initially done using Bottleneck Management principle elaborated in an extremely popular book in it's time, The Goal, by Eli Goldratt. The book focuses on the management and social issues. It sneaks in inventory management, operating expenses, cost accounting, scheduling and other domains, in the context of a story. The big take-aways for Overcrowded Hospitals are very simple:1) If your process has a bottleneck, and you improve anything about the process other than the bottle, the bottleneck will guarantee that the throughput will be unchanged. 2) Work-in-process inventory will reliably build up in front of the bottleneck. Any good electronic transactional system you already have in place can probably see it today. I included the graphics here to provide an example. You don't need to put in a new patient flow system to see it; how you manage the bottleneck depends on what you see. Julie was right! 3) Generally, you can't eliminate bottlenecks, although that would be nice. You need to exploit them and subordinate other processes. That's beyond this blog post. If asked, I will elaborate; comment below for a public answer, or email for a private response. 4) In healthcare processes, especially in hospitals, during the course of a year, bottlenecks definitely do "float." So, inadequate numbers of observation beds in February was a bottleneck at Shakespeare; it wasn't in June. 5) The local medical staff needs to have a central role in this work. Interpreting clinical process data without a deep grounding in diagnostic and therapeutic context is hazardous to anyone's health. So is proposing changes in care delivery systems without being able to credibly speak to that context. 6) The ROI side of the story: Capacity-driven organizations, that is, high fixed-cost, low variable cost operations are primarily driven by plant utilization. Improving operations, only to create capacity you don't use does not produce ROI. There is real, CFO-certifiable ROI in driving up 'throughput-dollar-day' plant utilization, by improving clinical operations as outlined here. This was the case at Shakespear. This can be a great management opportunity for overcrowded hospitals. In our example, the improvement in pneumonia management allowed for more profitable utilization of medical beds, while maintaining (and in some cases improving) clinical performance quality. What experience do we have in the readership regarding patient throughput and related BI initiatives?