Search results

One of the biggest challenges in the health sector is that of costs compared to economic resources and the quality of services. Hospitals register a progressive increase in expenditure due to the aging of the population. In fact, hip and knee arthroplasty surgery are mainly due to primary osteoarthritis that affects the elderly population. This study was carried out with the aim of analysing the introduction of the fast track surgery protocol, through the lean Six Sigma, on patients undergoing knee and hip prosthetic replacement surgery. The goal was to improve the arthroplasty surgery process by reducing the average length of stay (LOA) and hospital costs

Lean Six Sigma was applied to evaluate the arthroplasty surgery process through the DMAIC cycle (define, measure, analyse, improve and control) and the lean tools (value stream map), adopted to analyse the new protocol and improve process performance. The dataset consisted of two samples of patients: 54 patients before the introduction of the protocol and 111 patients after the improvement. Clinical and demographic variables were collected for each patient (gender, age, allergies, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score).

The results showed a 12.70% statistically significant decrease in LOS from an overall average of 8.72 to 7.61 days. Women patients without allergies, with a low ASA score not suffering from diabetes and cardiovascular disease showed a significant a reduction in hospital days with the implementation of the FTS protocol. Only the age variable was not statistically significant.

The introduction of the FTS in the orthopaedic field, analysed through the LSS, demonstrated to reduce LOS and, consequently, costs. For each individual patient, there was an economic saving of € 445.85. Since our study takes into consideration a dataset of 111 patients post-FTS, the overall economic saving brought by this study amounts to €49,489.35.

Head and neck cancers are multi-factorial diseases that can affect many sides of people's life and are due to a lot of risk factors. According to their characteristics, the treatment can be surgical, use of radiation or chemotherapy. The use of a surgical treatment can lead to surgical infections that are a main theme in medicine. At the University hospital of Naples “Federico II”, two antibiotics were employed to tackle the issue of the infections and they are compared in this paper to find which one implies the lowest length of hospital stay (LOS) and the reduction of infections.

The Six Sigma methodology and its problem-solving strategy DMAIC (define, measure, analyse, improve, control), already employed in the healthcare sector, were used as a tool of a health technology assessment between two drugs. In this paper the DMAIC roadmap is used to compare the Ceftriaxone (administered to a group of 48 patients) and the association of Cefazolin plus Clindamycin (administered to a group of 45 patients).

The results show that the LOS of patients treated with Ceftriaxone is lower than those who were treated with the association of Cefazolin plus Clindamycin, the difference is about 41%. Moreover, a lower number of complications and infections was found in patients who received Ceftriaxone. Finally, a greater number of antibiotic shifts was needed by patients treated with Cefazolin plus Clindamycin.

While the paper enhances clearly the advantages for patients' outcomes regarding the LOS and the number of complications, it did not analyse the costs of the two antibiotics.

Employing the Ceftriaxone would allow the Department of Maxillofacial Surgery to obtain lower LOS and a limited number of complications/infections for recovered patients, consequently reducing the hospitalization costs.

There is a double value in this paper: first of all, the comparison between the two antibiotics gives an answer to one of the main issues in medicine that is the reduction of hospital-acquired infections; secondly, the Six Sigma through its DMAIC cycle can be employed also to compare two biomedical technologies as a tool of health technology assessment studies.