Using human factors principles to redesign a 3D lab workflow during the COVID-19 pandemic.

IF 3.2 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Ethan P Larsen, Elizabeth Silvestro, Daria F Ferro, Asif Chinwalla, Natalie Oppenheimer, Sarah Rogers, Raymond W Sze, Flaura K Winston
{"title":"Using human factors principles to redesign a 3D lab workflow during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Ethan P Larsen, Elizabeth Silvestro, Daria F Ferro, Asif Chinwalla, Natalie Oppenheimer, Sarah Rogers, Raymond W Sze, Flaura K Winston","doi":"10.1186/s41205-022-00161-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Like most hospitals, our hospital experienced COVID-19 pandemic-related supply chain shortages. Our additive manufacturing lab's capacity to offset these shortages was soon overwhelmed, leading to a need to improve the efficiency of our existing workflow. We undertook a work system analysis guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) construct which is based on human factors and quality improvement principles. Our objective was to understand the inefficiencies in project submission, review, and acceptance decisions, and make systematic improvements to optimize lab operations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Contextual inquiry (interviews and workflow analysis) revealed suboptimal characteristics of the system, specifically, reliance on a single person to facilitate work and, at times, fractured communication with project sponsors, with root causes related to the project intake and evaluation process as identified through SEIPS tools. As interventions, the analysis led us to: 1) enhance an existing but underused project submission form, 2) design and implement an internal project scorecard to standardize evaluation of requests, and 3) distribute the responsibility of submission evaluation across lab members. We implemented these interventions in May 2021 for new projects and compare them to our baseline February 1, 2018 through - April 30, 2021 performance (1184 days).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All project requests were submitted using the enhanced project submission form and all received a standardized evaluation with the project scorecard. Prior to interventions, we completed 35/79 (44%) of projects, compared to 12/20 (60%) of projects after interventions were implemented. Time to review new submissions was reduced from an average of 58 days to 4 days. A more distributed team responsibility structure permitted improved workflow with no increase in staffing, allowing the Lab Manager to devote more time to engineering rather than administrative/decision tasks.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By optimizing our workflows utilizing a human factors approach, we improved the work system of our additive manufacturing lab to be responsive to the urgent needs of the pandemic. The current workflow provides insights for labs aiming to meet the growing demand for point-of-care manufacturing.</p>","PeriodicalId":72036,"journal":{"name":"3D printing in medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9655797/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"3D printing in medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-022-00161-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Like most hospitals, our hospital experienced COVID-19 pandemic-related supply chain shortages. Our additive manufacturing lab's capacity to offset these shortages was soon overwhelmed, leading to a need to improve the efficiency of our existing workflow. We undertook a work system analysis guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) construct which is based on human factors and quality improvement principles. Our objective was to understand the inefficiencies in project submission, review, and acceptance decisions, and make systematic improvements to optimize lab operations.

Methods: Contextual inquiry (interviews and workflow analysis) revealed suboptimal characteristics of the system, specifically, reliance on a single person to facilitate work and, at times, fractured communication with project sponsors, with root causes related to the project intake and evaluation process as identified through SEIPS tools. As interventions, the analysis led us to: 1) enhance an existing but underused project submission form, 2) design and implement an internal project scorecard to standardize evaluation of requests, and 3) distribute the responsibility of submission evaluation across lab members. We implemented these interventions in May 2021 for new projects and compare them to our baseline February 1, 2018 through - April 30, 2021 performance (1184 days).

Results: All project requests were submitted using the enhanced project submission form and all received a standardized evaluation with the project scorecard. Prior to interventions, we completed 35/79 (44%) of projects, compared to 12/20 (60%) of projects after interventions were implemented. Time to review new submissions was reduced from an average of 58 days to 4 days. A more distributed team responsibility structure permitted improved workflow with no increase in staffing, allowing the Lab Manager to devote more time to engineering rather than administrative/decision tasks.

Conclusions: By optimizing our workflows utilizing a human factors approach, we improved the work system of our additive manufacturing lab to be responsive to the urgent needs of the pandemic. The current workflow provides insights for labs aiming to meet the growing demand for point-of-care manufacturing.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在 COVID-19 大流行期间,利用人为因素原理重新设计 3D 实验室工作流程。
背景:与大多数医院一样,我们医院也经历了与 COVID-19 大流行相关的供应链短缺。我们的增材制造实验室抵消这些短缺的能力很快就不堪重负,因此需要提高现有工作流程的效率。我们在 "患者安全系统工程倡议"(SEIPS)结构的指导下进行了工作系统分析,该结构基于人为因素和质量改进原则。我们的目标是了解项目提交、审查和验收决策中的低效率问题,并进行系统性改进,以优化实验室运作:方法:情境调查(访谈和工作流程分析)揭示了系统的次优特征,特别是依赖单人推动工作,以及有时与项目发起人的沟通不畅,其根本原因与通过 SEIPS 工具确定的项目接收和评估流程有关。作为干预措施,通过分析,我们采取了以下措施1) 改进现有但使用率不高的项目提交表;2) 设计并实施内部项目记分卡,对申请进行标准化评估;3) 将提交评估的责任分配给实验室成员。我们于 2021 年 5 月针对新项目实施了这些干预措施,并将其与 2018 年 2 月 1 日至 2021 年 4 月 30 日的基线绩效(1184 天)进行了比较:结果:所有项目申请均使用增强型项目提交表提交,所有项目均通过项目记分卡进行了标准化评估。在采取干预措施之前,我们完成了 35/79 个项目(44%),而在采取干预措施之后,完成了 12/20 个项目(60%)。审查新提交项目的时间从平均 58 天减少到 4 天。更加分散的团队责任结构在不增加人员的情况下改善了工作流程,使实验室经理能够将更多的时间投入到工程而非行政/决策任务中:通过利用人为因素方法优化工作流程,我们改进了增材制造实验室的工作系统,以应对大流行病的紧急需求。当前的工作流程为旨在满足日益增长的护理点制造需求的实验室提供了启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信