Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Elimination of waste: creation of a successful Lean colonoscopy program at an academic medical center

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Lean processes involve streamlining methods and maximizing efficiency. Well established in the manufacturing industry, they are increasingly being applied to health care. The objective of this study was to determine feasibility and effectiveness of applying Lean principles to an academic medical center colonoscopy unit.

Methods

Lean process improvement involved training endoscopy personnel, observing patients, mapping the value stream, analyzing patient flow, designing and implementing new processes, and finally re-observing the process. Our primary endpoint was total colonoscopy time (minutes from check-in to discharge) with secondary endpoints of individual segment times and unit colonoscopy capacity.

Results

A total of 217 patients were included (November 2013–May 2014), with 107 pre-Lean and 110 post-Lean intervention. Pre-Lean total colonoscopy time was 134 min. After implementation of the Lean process, mean colonoscopy time decreased by 10 % to 121 min (p = 0.01). The three steps of the process affected by the Lean intervention (time to achieve adequate sedation, time to recovery, and time to discharge) decreased from 3.7 to 2.4 min (p < 0.01), 4.0 to 3.4 min (p = 0.09), and 41.2 to 35.4 min (p = 0.05), respectively. Overall, unit capacity of colonoscopies increased from 39.6 per day to 43.6. Post-Lean patient satisfaction surveys demonstrated an average score of 4.5/5.0 (n = 73) regarding waiting time, 4.9/5.0 (n = 60) regarding how favorably this experienced compared to prior colonoscopy experiences, and 4.9/5.0 (n = 74) regarding professionalism of staff. One hundred percentage of respondents (n = 69) stated they would recommend our institution to a friend for colonoscopy.

Discussion

With no additional utilization of resources, a single Lean process improvement cycle increased productivity and capacity of our colonoscopy unit. We expect this to result in increased patient access and revenue while maintaining patient satisfaction. We believe these results are widely generalizable to other colonoscopy units as well as other process-based interventions in health care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, Sturmer T, Hoffmeister M (2007) Potential for colorectal cancer prevention of sigmoidoscopy versus colonoscopy: population-based case control study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 16(3):494–499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. American Cancer Society (2011) Colorectal cancer facts & figures 2011–2013. http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@epidemiologysurveilance/documents/document/acspc-028312.pdf. Accessed 14 June 2015

  3. Harders M, Malangoni MA, Weight S, Sidhu T (2006) Improving operating room efficiency through process redesign. Am J Surg 140:509–516

    Google Scholar 

  4. Krafcik JF (1988) Triumph of the lean production system. Sloan Manage Rev 30(1):41–52

    Google Scholar 

  5. D’Andreamatteo A, Ianni L, Lega F, Sargiacomo M (2015) Lean in healthcare: a comprehensive review. Health Policy. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.02.002

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mason SE, Nicolay CR, Darzi A (2015) The use of lean and six sigma methodologies in surgery: a systematic review. Surgeon 13:91–100

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cima RR, Brown MJ, Hebl JR, Moore R, Rogers JC, Kollengode A, Amstutz GJ, Weisbrod CA, Narr BJ, Deschamps C (2011) Use of lean and six sigma methodology to improve operating room efficiency in a high-volume tertiary-care academic medical center. J Am Coll Surg 213:83–92 (discussion 93–94)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Toussaint JS, Berry LL (2013) The promise of lean in healthcare. Mayo Clin Proc 88(1):74–82

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mandel JE, Tanner JW, Lichtenstein GR, Metz DC, Katzka DA, Ginsberg GG, Kochman ML (2007) A randomized, double-blind trial of patient-controlled sedation with propofol/remifentanil versus midazolam/fentanyl for colonoscopy. Anesth Analg 106(2):434–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Vargo JJ, Bramley T, Meyer K, Nightengale B (2007) Practice efficiency and economics: the case for rapid recovery sedation agents for colonoscopy in a screening population. J Clin Gastroenterol 41(6):591–598

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dickson EW, Singh S, Cheung DS, Wyatt CC, Nugent AS (2009) Application of lean manufacturing techniques in the emergency department. J Emerg Med 37(2):177–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Collar RM, Shuman AG, Feiner S, McGonegal AK, Heidel N, Duck M, McLean SA, Billi JE, Healy DW, Bradford CR (2012) Lean management in academic surgery. J Am Coll Surg 214:928–936

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chapman F (2009) Practice Management. Highlights of 2009 ASGE endoscopic operations survey. ASGE News March/April 29–30. http://www.asge.org/uploadedfiles/asge_news/asgenewsmarch10.pdf

  14. Holden RJ (2010) Lean thinking in emergency departments: a critical review. Ann Emerg Med 57:265–278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Delisle DR (2015) Executing lean improvements: a practical guide with real-world healthcare studies. ASQ Quality Quality Press, Milwaukee

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA, 01655, USA

    Aneel Damle

  2. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA, USA

    Nathan Andrew, Karim Alavi & Justin Maykel

  3. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA, USA

    Shubjeet Kaur & Alan Orquiola

  4. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University Hospitals-Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Scott R. Steele

Authors
  1. Aneel Damle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nathan Andrew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shubjeet Kaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alan Orquiola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Karim Alavi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Scott R. Steele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Justin Maykel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aneel Damle.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Dr. Damle, Mr. Andrew, Drs. Kaur, Orquiola, Alavi, Steele, and Maykel have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Damle, A., Andrew, N., Kaur, S. et al. Elimination of waste: creation of a successful Lean colonoscopy program at an academic medical center. Surg Endosc 30, 3071–3076 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4599-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4599-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation