A critical review of the research literature on Six Sigma, Lean and StuderGroup's Hardwiring Excellence in the United States: the need to demonstrate and communicate the effectiveness of transformation strategies in healthcare

Abstract

BackgroundU.S. healthcare organizations are confronted with numerous and varied transformational strategies promising improvements along all dimensions of quality and performance. This article examines the peer-reviewed literature from the U.S. for evidence of effectiveness among three current popular transformational strategies: Six Sigma, Lean/Toyota Production System, and Studer's Hardwiring Excellence.MethodsThe English language health, healthcare management, and organizational science literature (up to December 2007) indexed in Medline, Web of Science, ABI/Inform, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and ERIC was reviewed for studies on the aforementioned transformation strategies in healthcare settings. Articles were included if they: appeared in a peer-reviewed journal; described a specific intervention; were not classified as a pilot study; provided quantitative data; and were not review articles. Nine references on Six Sigma, nine on Lean/Toyota Production System, and one on StuderGroup meet the study's eligibility criteria.ResultsThe reviewed studies universally concluded the implementations of these transformation strategies were successful in improving a variety of healthcare related processes and outcomes. Additionally, the existing literature reflects a wide application of these transformation strategies in terms of both settings and problems. However, despite these positive features, the vast majority had methodological limitations that might undermine the validity of the results. Common features included: weak study designs, inappropriate analyses, and failures to rule out alternative hypotheses. Furthermore, frequently absent was any attention to changes in organizational culture or substantial evidence of lasting effects from these efforts.ConclusionDespite the current popularity of these strategies, few studies meet the inclusion criteria for this review. Furthermore, each could have been improved substantially in order to ensure the validity of the conclusions, demonstrate sustainability, investigate changes in organizational culture, or even how one strategy interfaced with other concurrent and subsequent transformation efforts. While informative results can be gleaned from less rigorous studies, improved design and analysis can more effectively guide healthcare leaders who are motivated to transform their organizations and convince others of the need to employ such strategies. Demanding more exacting evaluation of projects consultants, or partnerships with health management researchers in academic settings, can support such efforts.

A Continuous Quality Improvement Program to Focus a College of Pharmacy on Programmatic Advancement

“…The composite score from AACP faculty survey instrument for questions 2, 15, 18, 27, 28, 33, 46, and composite average of 61, 62, 63, and 64. 2 From AACP graduating student survey instrument, "The College/School of Pharmacy is welcoming to students with diverse backgrounds. "…”

“…Increasing student involvement may include teaching them about the importance of quality improvement programs and training students in the AIDET technique which was effective in improving third-year medical students' interaction with their patients. 2 …”

Playing the Game of Health: Best Practices for Health Optimization Program in a Worksite Setting, with Case Study of a Real World Example

“…The Baldridge Criteria and Lean Six Sigma are used to achieve excellence and provide continuous quality improvement in both healthcare and worksite settings (Vest & Gamm, 2009). Using a systematic approach, gaps in performance can be identified more quickly allowing the process to be more agile and adaptive.…”

Mediating Role of the Six Sigma Implementation Strategy and Investment in Human Resources in Economic Success and Sustainability

“…There are many studies that associate Managerial commitment with successful SS implementation, including Vest and Gamm [17], who state that management is responsible for establishing a work plan for SS implementation and for directing the practices and techniques for improving processes, and Fairul-Anwar and Mohd Amran [30], who use affinity diagrams to integrate CSFs into just five groups, where Managerial commitment tops the list.…”