Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35127055›Full record

ArticleHealth systems (Basingstoke, England)2022

Outcomes of managing healthcare services using the Theory of Constraints: A systematic review.

Gustavo M Bacelar-Silva, James F Cox, Pedro Pereira Rodrigues

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health systems (Basingstoke, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

3 authors.

Gustavo M Bacelar-SilvaDepartment of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences, Faculty of Medicine (MEDCIDS-FMUP), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
James F CoxManagement Department, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Pedro Pereira RodriguesDepartment of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences, Faculty of Medicine (MEDCIDS-FMUP), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite ever-increasing resources devoted to healthcare, lack of capacity and timeliness are still chronic problems worldwide. This systematic review aims to present an overview of the Theory of Constraints (TOC) implementations in healthcare services and their outcomes. We analysed 42 TOC implementations (15 full-text articles, 12 video proceedings, and 2 theses/disserations) from major scientific electronic databases and TOC International Certification Organization Conferences. All implementations reported positive outcomes, both tangible and intangible. The two main improvements reported by authors were in productivity (98%; n = 41) - more patients treated - and in the timeliness of care (83%; n = 35). Furthermore, the selected studies reported dramatic improvements: 50% mean reductions in patient waiting time; 38% reduction in patient length of stay; 43% mean increase in operating room productivity and 34% mean increase in throughput. TOC implementations attained positive results in all levels of the health and social care chain. Most TOC recommendations and changes showed almost immediate results and required little or no additional cost to implement. Evidence supports TOC as a promising solution for the chronic healthcare problem, improving quality and timeliness, both necessary conditions for providing effective healthcare.

Indexed as

health services managementpatient flowprocesses of ongoing improvementquality improvementsystematic reviewTheory of constraints

Identifiers

PMID35127055
PMCPMC8812771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.