Overview - Lab Quality Confab

Transcription

Tackling the Challenge of Specimen Tracking Within
and Without the Cleveland Clinic:
How We Reduced Lost Specimens
Kavous Roumina, Ph.D.
Cleveland Clinic
Center for Pathology Informatics (CPI)
November 6, 2012
Tackling Challenges …
1
Overview
•! Background
•! Evaluation Process
•! Implementation Phase
•! Post-Implementation Observations:
–! Problems Encountered
–! Lessons Learned
•! Pre-Analytics Metrics:
–! “Defect” Reduction
2
1
Background
•! Cleveland Clinic
–! Multi-specialty academic medical center
–! 1400 Beds
–! 2800 Physicians and Residents
•! Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Institute (PLMI)
–! AP, CP, Molecular, and Outreach Departments
–! 1600 Employees
–! 12.9m Billable Tests (FY2012)
!! Over 100K surgical pathology accessions
–! LISs: AP (Cerner CoPathPlus); CP (Sunquest Lab)
–! Outreach: Atlas LabWorks
–! Specimen Tracking (Gajema) at Main Campus Hospital Only
3
Evaluation
•! Formed Evaluation Team (Q1 2008)
–! AP/CP supervisors
–! Logistics manager
–! Client Services manager
–! Sales & Marketing manager
•! Distributed RFPs (20+ functional requirements)
•! Other systems considered
•! Chose Gajema, Q4 2009
4
2
Implementation
•! Formed Implementation Team (Evaluation Team Plus):
–! Lab IT Hardware/Software Support Personnel
–! Phlebotomy Transport Services
–! Cerner CoPathPlus (CPP) Support Personnel
–! Gajema Staff
•! Kickoff: March 2010
•! Employed Gajema-supplied project plan
–! March Through July 2010
•! Weekly, hour-long conference calls
5
Implementation (Cont.)
•! Gajema modules/features implemented:
–! Tracking
–! Customer Services
–! Supply Management (partially)
–! Fleet Management
–! Interface with AP LIS (CoPath Plus)
6
3
•! Multiple system tables needed to be populated:
–! Locations (possible to extract from CoPath Plus)
–! Routes (partially extracted from previous automated system)
–! Vehicles (partially extracted from …)
–! Users (considered HRIS)
–! Courier exceptions
!! “No Specimens”, “Specimens Not Ready”, “Pick-up Cancelled”
–! Tests (or Procedures; for Client Services)
–! Specimen Types (possible to extract from CoPath Plus)
!! “Urine”, “Pap”, “Culture”, “Fresh Tissue”, “Mixed Specimen”
7
•! Tasks:
–! Server setup
!! Application (by Gajema)
!! Database (hardware: Lab IT; schema/structure: Gajema)
!! Synchronization (Central IT)
–! Workstation setup:
!! Few thick clients
!! Mostly thin clients (via Citrix servers)
–! Network setup:
!! 100 Mbps (Mega bits per second) Ethernet ports for cradles
!! Wireless network connectivity (for internal couriers)
!! Cellular network connectivity (Data and Voice plans; for
outreach couriers)
8
4
•! Place hardware diagram here
9
•! Training
–! Handheld PCs (HPCs) for couriers (2 Days)
!! Outside couriers (servicing outreach clients) - 14
!! Inside couriers - 12
•! In- and Out-Patient locations (“Sneaker Patrol”)
•! Intra-Lab couriers (Cyto-Micro or CPA-SurgPath)
–! Desktop Application (for monitoring and/or reporting; 3-4 Days)
!! System managers (for various implemented modules)
!! End-Users (container creators/un-loaders, client services reps.,
dispatchers, etc.)
10
5
•! Decisions To Make:
–! Tracking ID value (i.e., Bar code)
!! Generic, or
!! Patient-Related (EMR-Centric)
–! Workflow
!! Keep current, or
!! Modify exiting flow
–! User roles (non-couriers)
!! One System Administrator, or
!! Several System Managers (Logistics and Client Services)
11
•! Decisions To Make:
–! Location (Client) ID naming convention
!! Keep existing (if any), or
!! Design new
–! Duplicate specimen IDs
!! Ignore, or
!! Find work-around
–! Where to locate cradles
–! How many HPCs to allocate to each dept./area
12
6
13
•! Additional items needed:
–! Bar code readers (for container packing)
–! Printers (for container packing lists)
–! “Space” to sort and separate specimens
14
7
15
16
8
17
18
9
19
•! Interface with AP LIS (CoPath)
–! Allows for “Hand off” of specimen to AP LIS
•! No interface with CP LIS (Sunquest)!
20
10
21
•! Pre- Go-Live
–! Perform multiple “Test-Runs”
–! Ensure users can login to the Production environment (no
expired passwords!)
•! Day of Go-Live (August 2010)
–! Select time of day (if 24-hour operation)
–! Expect delays in processing times (prior to reaching “steady
state”)
22
11
Pre-Analytics Specimen Tracking Workflow
23
•! Place the AP diagram here
24
12
•! Place the CP diagram here
25
Post-Implementation - Problems Encountered
•! Duplicate specimen IDs
•! Limited characters for location/client ID naming
convention (10)
–! Hampering expansion to Regional/Community hospitals
•! Non-Bar coded specimens or requisitions
–! Deployed generic, pre-printed, bar coded labels
26
13
27
•! Some functions/tasks require excessive and, at
times, inconsistent keyboard/mouse interaction (e.g.
container loading/unloading)
•! Handling same volume (of specimens) initially
required additional processing time
•! Managing large number of HPCs (50+)
–! Identification labels
–! Private wireless network communication issues
–! Wireless cellular network (data carrier) issues
•! “Finicky-ness” of some HPCs
–! Provided a “Trouble-Shooting” document to couriers
–! Bar codes placed close to each other (2D issue?)
28
14
29
30
15
•! Multiple specimen pickup scenarios
–! Physician offices: 5 variations
–! Family Health Centers: 7 variations
–! Web portal clients: 10 variations
–! Hospitals (LIS-LIS interfaced): 3 variations
–! Hospitals (Non-interfaced): 2 variations
•! Contracted couriers (weekends/holidays)
–! Not using Gajema
–! How to train (if they were to use it)
31
Post-Implementation - Lessons Learned
•! Request more HPCs than anticipated
–! Keep a few charged and on reserve (for when they stop
functioning and no one is around to “fix” them)
•! Request fewer desktop licenses than anticipated
–! Not everyone in departments impacted needs one
32
16
•! Provide multiple cradles during training sessions
•! Select a meaningful tracking ID (e.g. EMR Order ID)
–! Advantage: Easily associated with a patient
–! Disadvantage: When not bar coded, requires many
keystrokes to record data (both on the HPCs and the
desktop application)
33
•! Steep learning curve for some couriers
–! To help couriers and to speed up delivery times,
implemented following “rules”:
!! If barcode is visible/present
•! Scan code on requisition; or
•! Scan code on specimen
!! Else,
•! For quantities < 5, attach generic barcode label to individual
specimen bags then scan
•! For quantities >= 5, place specimens in a pre-labeled, larger
bag then scan
–! For any future expansions, introduce system to couriers
individually
34
17
•! Continue meeting with the implementation team
post-live
•! Schedule additional “Best Practices” sessions for
laboratory managers/supervisors (to monitor
activities)
•! Hard reboot of HPCs resets date/time to a
predefined date (Jan. 1, 2007)
35
Post-Implementation - Successes
•! Proactive vs. Reactive
–! AP pending log
•! Many “potentially” lost specimens have been located
36
18
Pre-Analytics Metrics
37
CP/MP (Main Campus) – Volumes
38
19
CP/MP (Main Campus) – “Defects”
39
AP (Main Campus) – Volumes
40
20
AP (Main Campus) – “Defects”
41
Possible Future Improvements
•! Investigate/Implement route optimization
•! Apply Continuous Improvement (CI) methodology to
specimen workflow
42
21
Questions/Comments?
43
22

Overview - Lab Quality Confab

Transcription

Similar documents

How To Make Practice Exciting!

2014 Waterwise Conference A Water Company perspective

superanal

Cym canaliculatum - Cymbidium Orchid Club of Western Australia

(peripheral blood or bone marrow aspirate

ethical dilemmas in policing

Combatting Gender-related Violence

ANTIDEPRESIVOS TRICICLICOS (TCA)

VS120 - Olympus

The VS120: Providing a Complete Spectrum of