S G Elkhuizen, M Limburg, P J M Bakker, N S Klazinga
{"title":"Evidence-based re-engineering: re-engineering the evidence--a systematic review of the literature on business process redesign (BPR) in hospital care.","authors":"S G Elkhuizen, M Limburg, P J M Bakker, N S Klazinga","doi":"10.1108/09526860610686980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Business process redesign (BPR) is used to implement organizational transformations towards more customer-focused and cost-effective care. Ideally, these innovations should be carefully described and evaluated so that \"best practices\" can be re-applied. To investigate this, available evidence was collected on patient care redesign projects.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>The Ebsco Business Source Premier, Embase and Medline databases were searched. Studies on innovations related to re-engineering patient care that used before-after design as minimum prerequisites were selected. General characteristics, logistic parameters and other outcome measures to determine the objectives and results and interventions used were looked at.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>A total of 86 studies that conformed to the criteria were found: a minority mentioned measurable parameters in their objectives. In the majority of studies, multiple interventions were combined within single studies, making it impossible to compare the effects of individual interventions. Only three randomized controlled trials were found. Furthermore, inconsistencies were noted between the study objectives and the reported results. Many more issues were reported in the results than were mentioned in the study aims. It would appear that publications were hard to find owing to a lack of specific MeSH headings. Nearly 7,500 abstracts were scanned and from these it was concluded that clear and univocal research methods, terms and reporting guidelines are advisable and must be developed in order to learn and benefit from BPR innovations in health care organizations.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>This appears to be the first time available evidence about redesign projects in hospitals has been systematically collected and assessed.</p>","PeriodicalId":80009,"journal":{"name":"International journal of health care quality assurance incorporating Leadership in health services","volume":"19 6-7","pages":"477-99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/09526860610686980","citationCount":"52","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of health care quality assurance incorporating Leadership in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/09526860610686980","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 52
Abstract
Purpose: Business process redesign (BPR) is used to implement organizational transformations towards more customer-focused and cost-effective care. Ideally, these innovations should be carefully described and evaluated so that "best practices" can be re-applied. To investigate this, available evidence was collected on patient care redesign projects.
Design/methodology/approach: The Ebsco Business Source Premier, Embase and Medline databases were searched. Studies on innovations related to re-engineering patient care that used before-after design as minimum prerequisites were selected. General characteristics, logistic parameters and other outcome measures to determine the objectives and results and interventions used were looked at.
Findings: A total of 86 studies that conformed to the criteria were found: a minority mentioned measurable parameters in their objectives. In the majority of studies, multiple interventions were combined within single studies, making it impossible to compare the effects of individual interventions. Only three randomized controlled trials were found. Furthermore, inconsistencies were noted between the study objectives and the reported results. Many more issues were reported in the results than were mentioned in the study aims. It would appear that publications were hard to find owing to a lack of specific MeSH headings. Nearly 7,500 abstracts were scanned and from these it was concluded that clear and univocal research methods, terms and reporting guidelines are advisable and must be developed in order to learn and benefit from BPR innovations in health care organizations.
Originality/value: This appears to be the first time available evidence about redesign projects in hospitals has been systematically collected and assessed.
目的:业务流程重新设计(BPR)用于实现向更加以客户为中心和更具成本效益的服务的组织转换。理想情况下,应该仔细描述和评估这些创新,以便可以重新应用“最佳实践”。为了调查这一点,收集了病人护理重新设计项目的现有证据。设计/方法/方法:检索Ebsco Business Source Premier、Embase和Medline数据库。选取以事前-事后设计为最低先决条件的再造病患照护相关创新研究。研究了确定目标和结果的一般特征、逻辑参数和其他结果措施以及所使用的干预措施。结果:共发现86项符合标准的研究:少数研究在其目标中提到了可测量参数。在大多数研究中,在单个研究中合并了多个干预措施,因此无法比较单个干预措施的效果。只发现了三个随机对照试验。此外,研究目标和报告结果之间也存在不一致之处。结果中报告的问题比研究目的中提到的要多得多。由于缺乏具体的MeSH标题,出版物似乎很难找到。扫描了近7500份摘要,从中得出的结论是,明确和明确的研究方法、术语和报告准则是可取的,必须制定这些方法、术语和报告准则,以便从保健组织的业务流程再造创新中学习和受益。独创性/价值:这似乎是第一次系统地收集和评估关于医院重新设计项目的现有证据。