The environmental context and operational focus primarily influenced process design of the cataract pathways. When pressed to further optimize their processes, hospitals can use these systematic benchmarking data to decrease the frequency of hospital visits, lead times and costs.

Operating room (OR) planning and scheduling is a popular and challenging subject within the operational research applied to health services research (ORAHS). However, the impact in practice is very limited. The organization and culture of a hospital and the inherent characteristics of its processes impose specific implementation issues that affect the success of planning approaches. Current tactical OR planning approaches often fail to account for these issues. Master surgical scheduling (MSS) is a promising approach for hospitals to optimize resource utilization and patient flows. We discuss the pros and cons of MSS and compare MSS with centralized and decentralized planning approaches. Finally, we address various implementation issues of MSS and discuss its suitability for hospitals with different organizational foci and culture.Keywords Master surgical scheduling · Organizational issues · Operating room management · Organizational focus and culture · Health care operations planning and scheduling

BackgroundFocusing on specific treatments or diseases is proposed as a way to increase the efficiency of hospital care. The definition of "focus" or "focused factory", however, lacks clarity. Examples in health care literature relate to very different organizations.Our aim was to explore the application of the focused factory concept in hospital care, including an indication of its performance, resulting in a conceptual framework that can be helpful in further identifying different types of focused factories. Thus contributing to the understanding of the diversity of examples found in the literature.MethodsWe conducted a cross-case comparison of four multiple-case studies into hospital care. To cover a broad array of focus, different specialty fields were selected. Each study investigated the organizational context, the degree of focus, and the operational performance. Focus was measured using an instrument translated from industry. Data were collected using both qualitative and quantitative methods and included site visits. A descriptive analysis was performed at the case study and cross-case studies level.ResultsThe operational performance per specialty field varied considerably, even when cases showed comparable degrees of focus. Cross-case comparison showed three focus domains. The product domain considered specialty based focused factories that treated patients for a single-specialty, but did not pursue a specific strategy nor adapted work-designs or layouts. The process domain considered delivery based focused factories that treated multiple groups of patients and often pursued strategies to improve efficiency and timeliness and adapted work-designs and physical layouts to minimize delays. The product-process domain considered procedure based focused factories that treated a single well-defined group of patients offering one type of treatment. The strategic focusing decisions and the design of the care delivery system appeared especially important for delivery and procedure based focused factories.ConclusionsFocus in hospital care relates to limitations on the patient group treated and the range of services offered. Based on these two dimensions, we identified three types of focused factories: specialty based, delivery based, and procedure based. Focus could lead to better operational performance, but only when clear strategic focusing decisions are made.

No abstract