Dissemination of lean methods to improve pap testing quality and patient safety

Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 103-110

  Raab, Stephen S ^a,c   Andrew Jaja, Carey ^a   Grzybicki, Dana M ^b   Vrbin, Colleen M ^a   Chesin, Carole M ^a   Fisch, John M ^a   Dabbs, David J ^a   Sommer, Deborah L ^a   Blaser, Sandra M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; Lean methods; Pap test; Patient safety; Screening

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SAFETY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU;

CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 41449088533     PISSN: 10892591     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0b013e31815ae9a1     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Jones BA, Novis DA. Cervical biopsy-cytology correlation. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1996;120:523-31.
2. Raab SS, Grzybicki DM, Janosky JE, Zarbo RJ, Meier FA, Jensen C, et al. Clinical impact and frequency of anatomic pathology errors in cancer diagnoses. Cancer 2005;104:2205-13.
3. Clary KM, Silverman JF, Liu Y, Sturgis CD, Grzybicki DM, Mahood LK, et al. Cytohistologic discrepancies: a means to improve pathology practice and patient outcomes. Am J Clin Pathol 2002;117:567-73.
4. Cantaboni A, Pezzotta MG, Sironi M, Porcellati M. Quality assurance in pathology. Cytologic and histologic correlation. Acta Cytol 1992;36:717-21.
5. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Care Financing Administration. Clinical laboratory improvement amendments of 1988: Final rule, 57 Federal Register 7146 (1992) (codified at 42 CFR §493).
6. Raab SS, Andrew-JaJa C, Condel JL, Dabbs D. Improving Papanicolaou test quality and reducing medical errors by using Toyota production system methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;194:57-64.
7. Ohno T. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Portland: Productivity Press; 1988.
8. Liker J. The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles From the World's Greatest Manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2004.
9. Mishina K, Takeda K. Toyota Motor Manufacturing, USA, Inc. Boston: Harvard Business School; 1992.
10. Spear S, Bowen K. Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System. Boston: Harvard Business Press; 1999.
11. Pittsburgh Regional Healthcare Initiative. Perfecting Patient Care System Educational Materials. Pittsburgh: PRHI; 2002.
12. Chalice RW. Stop Rising Healthcare Costs Using Toyota Lean Production Methods. 38 Steps for Improvement. Milwaukee: Quality Press; 2005.
13. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarity A, O'Conner D, Prey M, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-9.
14. Barton SE, Jenkins D, Hollingworth A, Cuzick J, Singer A. An explanation for the problem of false-negative cervical smears. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989;96:482-5.
15. Baer A, Kiviat NB, Kulasingham S, Mao C, Kuypers J, Koutsky LA. Liquid-based Papanicolaou smears without a transformation zone component: should clinicians worry? Obstet Gynecol 2002;99:1053-9.
16. Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B. Liquid-based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:308-17.
17. Lorincz AT, Richart RM. Human papillomavirus DNA testing as an adjunct to cytology in cervical screening programs. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127:959-68.
18. Buntinx F, Brouwers M. Relation between sampling device and detection of abnormality in cervical smears: a meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized studies. BMJ 1996;313:1285-90.
19. Jimmerson C, Weber D, Sobek DK. Reducing waste and errors: piloting lean principles at Intermountain Healthcare. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2005;31:249-57.
20. South SF, Tanley PC, Steane SM, Thomas AT, Miers M, Sorenson EA. Work process redesign at Vanderbilt University Medical Center's transfusion service. Clin Lab Manage Rev 1997;11:156-64.
21. Davey E, Barratt A, Irwig L, Chan SF, Macaskill P, Mannes P, et al. Effect of study design and quality on unsatisfactory rates, cytology classifications and accuracy in liquid-based versus conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review. Lancet 2006;367:122-32.
22. Jones BA, Novis DA. Follow-up of abnormal gynecologic cytology. A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 16,132 cases from 306 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:665-71.
23. O'Sullivan I, Orbell S, Rakow T, Parker R. Prospective research in health service settings: health psychology science and the 'Hawthorne' effect. J Health Psychol 2004;9:355-9.
24. Lied TR, Kazandjian VA. A Hawthorne strategy: Implications for performance measurement and improvement. Clin Perform Qual Health Care 1998;6:201-4.
25. van Bokhoven MA, Kok G, van der Weijden T. Designing a quality improvement intervention: a systematic approach. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12:215-20.