Nursing
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/24
Browse
3 results
Search Results
Item Lean Six Sigma redesign of a process for healthcare mandatory education in basic life support—a pilot study(MDPI, 2021-11-06) Dempsey, Anne; Robinson, Ciara; Moffatt, Niamh; Hennessy, Therese; Bradshaw, Annmarie; Teeling, Sean Paul; Ward, Mari; McNamara, MartinHealthcare staff are required to undertake mandatory training programs to ensure they maintain key clinical competencies. This study was conducted in a private hospital in Ireland, where the processes for accessing mandatory training were found to be highly complex and non-user friendly, resulting in missed training opportunities, specific training license expiration, and underutilized training slots which resulted in lost time for both the trainers and trainees. A pilot study was undertaken to review the process for accessing mandatory training with a focus on the mandatory training program of Basic Life Support (BLS). This was chosen due to its importance in patient resuscitation and its requirement in the hospital achieving Joint Commission International (JCI) accreditation. A pre- and post-team-based intervention design was used with Lean Six Sigma (LSS) methodology employed to redesign the process of booking, scheduling, and delivery of BLS training leading to staff individual BLS certification for a period of two years. The redesign of the BLS training program resulted in a new blended delivery method, and the initiation of a pilot project led to a 50% increase in the volume of BLS classes and a time saving of 154 h 30 min for staff and 48 h 14 min for BLS instructors. The success of the BLS process access pilot has functioned as a platform for the redesign of other mandatory education programs and will be of interest to hospitals with mandatory training requirements that are already facing healthcare challenges and demands on staff time.Item A realist inquiry to identify the contribution of Lean Six Sigma to person-centred care and cultures(MDPI, 2021-10-03) Teeling, Sean Paul; Dewing, Jan; Baldie, DeborahA lack of fidelity to Lean Six Sigma’s (LSS) philosophical roots can create division between person-centred approaches to transforming care experiences and services, and system wide quality improvement methods focused solely on efficiency and clinical outcomes. There is little research into, and a poor understanding of, the mechanisms and processes through which LSS education influences healthcare staffs’ person-centred practice. This realist inquiry asks ‘whether, to what extent and in what ways, LSS in healthcare contributes to person-centred care and cultures’. Realist review identified three potential Context, Mechanism, Outcome configurations (CMOcs) explaining how LSS influenced practice, relating to staff, patients, and organisational influences. Realist evaluation was used to explore the CMOc relating to staff, showing how they interacted with a LSS education Programme (the intervention) with CMOc adjudication by the research team and study participants to determine whether, to what extent, and in what ways it influenced person-centred cultures. Three more focused CMOcs emerged from the adjudication of the CMOc relating to staff, and these were aligned to previously identified synergies and divergences between participants’ LSS practice and person-centred cultures. This enabled us to understand the contribution of LSS to person-centred care and cultures that contribute to the evidence base on the study of quality improvement beyond intervention effectiveness alone.Item A discussion of the synergy and divergence between Lean Six Sigma and person-centred improvement sciences(Science Publications, 2020-04-13) Teeling, Sean Paul; Dewing, Jan; Baldie, DeborahBackground: This paper discusses if and how the improvement sciences of Lean Six Sigma and person-centred approaches can be melded or blended in the health care context. The discussion highlights the relationship between each approach to improvement science in terms of their respective purposes, intentions and probable outcomes; positioning these as either synergies or divergences. Comparison of the key theoretical and methodological principles underpinning each approach to improvement is also considered and implications for future practice, policy and research are drawn out. The discussion is informed by part of the findings of a realist review of relevant literature.