[Histonet] Benchmarking information

Mon Feb 18 10:53:18 CST 2013

No politician here, just plain old!
René J.

From: David Kemler <histotalk <@t> yahoo.com>
To: Rene J Buesa <rjbuesa <@t> yahoo.com>; Fellow HistoNetters <Histonet <@t> Lists.UTSouthwestern.edu> 
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Benchmarking information

Way to go Rene! Are you a politician on the side? LOL Just kidding - couldn't help myself! :)

Yours,
Dave

From: Rene J Buesa <rjbuesa <@t> yahoo.com>
To: "joelleweaver <@t> hotmail.com" <joelleweaver <@t> hotmail.com> 
Cc: Histonet <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>; "Sheila.Tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org" <Sheila.Tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org> 
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Benchmarking information

Joel: 
It is not that I did not care about your response, it is that it was not a good advise.
You have to remind that when somebody asks HistoNet it is because they do not know about the question and are seeking advise and very probably they will follow the advise.
If somebody tries to improve the work flow of the lab and its TAT that person cannot look "inwards" because they will just understand their operation and that does not guarantee improvement.
The only way you have to improve is, after knowing what you do, is to compare and "emulate" those who have the best rates.
Competition is the basis and you cannot compete if you only look "inwards".
Your initial advise was correct (as I state) and allowed to know yourself but the improvement process has to expand to others.
I also stated that I intended no offense so, if you felt offended, please forgive me.
I was only trying to help a fellow HistoNeter!
René J.

From: "joelleweaver <@t> hotmail.com" <joelleweaver <@t> hotmail.com>
To: Rene J Buesa <rjbuesa <@t> yahoo.com>; "sheila.tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org" <sheila.tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org>; "histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu> 
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Benchmarking information

Sorry you did not care for my two cents, just trying to help

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone

----- Reply message -----
From: "Rene J Buesa" <rjbuesa <@t> yahoo.com>
To: "joelle weaver" <joelleweaver <@t> hotmail.com>, "sheila.tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org" <sheila.tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org>, "histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Subject: [Histonet] Benchmarking information
Date: Sat, Feb 16, 2013 9:54 am

I feel the "urge" of commenting on this advise about how to determine a benchmark for a histology lab.

1- I agree that you should first know your lab and how long it takes for your techs to complete the work-flow from receiving the specimens to reporting the final diagnosis BUT
2- if you just stop at that point you will be unable to determine if you have a problem. Finding problems and developing solutions can only be achieved if you COMPARE your lab to others and how efficient you are, how your TAT in each step of the process compares with with other labs of the same size (similar workload, staff and technology).
3- unless you compare you cannot develop strategies to do at least as well as others do.
4- to achieve the comparison objective you have to have information about other labs and you can only find about that if you hire a consultant (very expensive) or if you reffer yourself to published information. I think that you will find useful some articles I have written on the subject and that you can find at http://www.histosearch.com/rene.html

Finally, the article you have been referred to (http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6890/10/2) in its original version was a propaganda for the VentanaSymphony autostainer and had to be rewritten to achieve its present form. Essentially lacks the information you need (no offense intended, just the facts from my point of view).
René J.

From: joelle weaver <joelleweaver <@t> hotmail.com>
To: sheila.tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org; histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu 
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 5:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Benchmarking information

The best option is your own process mapping and time studies of these processes working in your own lab environment. It is usually easiest if you intially break it down into the preanalyic, analytic and post analytic phases and the critical variables that reduce your delivery times or contribute to impact each of the bottlenecks/delays/errors/ problems, in each phasse,  and then put these in problem statements in your  LSS project charters. It gets convoluted if you put them all in one, so I think it is best if you find one that you can target as a "quick win" and use the momentum from this for further projects. Do a detailed "as is process" map  from your current data and then work on streamlining by elimination of those items to build a more standardized and improved " how you want it to be" process map. This becomes your SOP more or less for the new procedure.  I know you wanted numbers, but I guess I feel your own numbers are going to be a lot
more useful.  However, there are a few references out there that are pretty detailed and are more or less case studies that have some numerical data. For example-The combined positive impact of Lean methodology and Ventana Symphony autostainer on histology lab workflow-  http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6890/10/2 This article may give you some ideas to get started. 

Joelle Weaver MAOM, HTL (ASCP) QIHC
> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:45:27 -0600
> From: Sheila.Tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org
> To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> Subject: [Histonet] Benchmarking information
> 
> We are working on a Lean/SixSigma project in our Histology Lab to
> decrease our TAT for pathology reports.  Part of this process is to
> break down the total time and look at the different stages of the
> process to help identify where waste in the process is, such as:
> 
> *    Time from receipt in lab to delivery of slides to pathologists 
> *    Time special stains are ordered to delivery of slides to
> pathologists  
> *    Etc. 
> 
> Does anyone have any benchmarking information out there to share on
> this?  Any help is appreciated.  
> 
>  
> 
> _________________________________________________
> 
> Sheila Tapper
> Anatomic Pathology Supervisor
> Essentia Health
> SMDC Laboratory
> Pathology 3W SMMC
> 407 East Third Street, Duluth, MN 55805
> P: 218-786-5472 | F: 218-786-2369
> 
> sheila.tapper <@t> essentiahealth.org
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
                        _______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet