Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27756348›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Does lean muddy the quality improvement waters? A qualitative study of how a hospital management team understands lean in the context of quality improvement.

Carl Savage, Louise Parke, Mia von Knorring, Pamela Mazzocato

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The outcomes of Lean management in a large academic hospital in Finland in 2018-2023: a qualitative study.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Healthcare Engineering: A Lean Management Approach.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2020
    Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Carl SavageMedical Management Centre, Department for Learning, Informatics, Ethics and Management, Karolinska Institutet, Tomtebodavägen 18A, SE-17177, Stockholm, Sweden. carl.savage@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0003-2836-903X
Louise ParkeMedical Management Centre, Department for Learning, Informatics, Ethics and Management, Karolinska Institutet, Tomtebodavägen 18A, SE-17177, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mia von KnorringMedical Management Centre, Department for Learning, Informatics, Ethics and Management, Karolinska Institutet, Tomtebodavägen 18A, SE-17177, Stockholm, Sweden.
Pamela MazzocatoMedical Management Centre, Department for Learning, Informatics, Ethics and Management, Karolinska Institutet, Tomtebodavägen 18A, SE-17177, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care has experimented with many different quality improvement (QI) approaches with greater variation in name than content. This has been dubbed pseudoinnovation. However, it could also be that the subtleties and differences are not clearly understood. To explore this further, the purpose of this study was to explore how hospital managers perceive lean in the context of QI.

methodsWe used a qualitative study design with semi-structured interviews to explore twelve top managers' perceptions of the relationship between lean and quality improvement (QI) at a university-affiliated hospital.

resultsManagers described that QI and lean shared the same overall purpose: focus on patient needs and improve efficiency and effectiveness. Employee involvement was emphasized in both strategies, as well as the support offered by managers of staff initiatives. QI was perceived as a strategy that could support structural changes at the organizational level whereas lean was seen as applicable at the operational level. Moreover, lean carried a negative connotation, lacked the credibility of QI, and was perceived as a management fad.

conclusionsAspects of QI and lean were misunderstood. In a context where lean remains an abstract term, and staff associate lean with automotive applications and cost reduction, it may be fruitful for managers to invest time and resources to develop a strategy for continual improvement and utilize vocabulary that resonates with health care staff. This could reduce the risk that improvement efforts are rejected out of hand.

Indexed as

Efficiency, OrganizationalFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHospital AdministratorsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementTotal Quality ManagementHospitalLeanManagement teamPseudoinnovationQualitative studyQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID27756348
PMCPMC5069852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.