ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2018
Applying lean methodology to improve parenteral chemotherapy and monoclonal antibody documentation processes based on Normalisation Process Theory.
Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the impact of lean thinking on the original time required to prepare the necessary documentation in relation to the preparation of parenteral chemotherapy/monoclonal antibodies.
methodFour pharmacists and one pharmacy technician from the oncology hospital (Malta) all participated in eight focus groups linked to the different constructs of Normalisation Process Theory (NPT): coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. The value stream documentation process was mapped by analysing all steps in the process where each activity must add value for the patient; tools of lean thinking were applied. Points causing delay in processing were considered critical; possible changes to minimise time waste were discussed and implemented. Time spent on critical points was measured by timing in minutes each step of the process 1 month before and after the changes had been implemented and calculating the mean±SD. An audit was performed comparing the process with standard operating procedures to determine whether any steps required quality improvement.
resultsThree critical points were identified: time required to search for pharmacy patient medication records for chemotherapy/monoclonal antibodies required on the day; time to generate preparation labels; and time to generate worksheets. Overall, a total of 122±8.6 min (p=0.06) were saved per day, a 37% decrease from the original documentation time. Five deficiencies were identified in the documentation process audit; corrective action was proposed.
conclusionsBy applying lean thinking, non-value-added steps leading to time waste in the documentation process were eliminated. This concept could be implemented by using NPT as part of a strategic system to reduce waste.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.