FEATURE LABORATORY MANAGEMENT 017
The most cited example of effective benchmarking is Abington
Memorial Hospital (AMH) near Philadelphia that used benchmarking to help laboratory staff improve in key areas, exceeding previous performance levels to become one of the best labs in the field. The overriding logic of benchmarking is that any function that must be managed must first be measured. Only measurement can establish whether staff, processes, and instrumentation are producing results within shorter turnaround time (TAT) or higher staff productivity which most labs seek. Benchmarking identifies best practices within one lab or in other institutions that can be used as goals or points of reference to compare lab results. A best practice usually represents a breakthrough in efficiency or effectiveness that multiple sources agree is superior. A best practice is practical; it works favorably in real-world conditions and can be replicated by other labs. The best practice is to benchmark against one’s past performance
to determine the level of improvement. However, it is imperative not to change the method of measurement but to change the process. Further, benchmarking may be internal or competitive. Internal benchmarking refers to identification of best practice
in a department within the lab and replicating the same in other departments. It is an inexpensive and relatively faster process. Though, it can help in replicating best practices within a lab, it cannot compare to other laboratories. Competitive benchmarking enables an organization to assess and compare performance to peer facilities of similar size, patient acuity, and staffing. Competitive benchmarking has drawbacks as well: peer
“Benchmarking is the practice of being humble enough to admit that someone else is better at something and wise enough to try and learn how to match, and even surpass, them at it”
a process of measuring products, services and practice among peers and against leaders of a field. This systematic process of benchmarking not only enables to discover the best practices but also aids in incorporating these best practices into operations. In other words, benchmarking is the practice of being humble enough to admit that someone else is better at something and wise enough to try and learn how to match, and even surpass, them at it. The term ‘benchmarking’ originated centuries ago when carpenters
and metalworkers notched their benches to help apprentices cut stock to a consistent length (see figure 1). In the current scenario, benchmarking has become corporate-speak for a widely accepted performance or quality standard. Since high-pressure healthcare economy allows less room for substandard results, the quality of a lab’s performance must be measured and compared to a standard benchmark.
facilities may not be sufficiently comparable, or they might be reluctant to share data because of competitive or confidentiality issues. Also, competitive benchmarking yields only numbers, not action plans. College of American Pathologists (CAP) has made competitive
benchmarking among peers simpler by offering several quality management tools like Q-PROBES, Q-TRACKS, LMIP and CAP LINKS. These programs gather peer group data on defined aspects of quality practice in pathology and lab medicine. Any lab which desires to use competitive benchmarking can subscribe to these external peer comparison programs. The systematic approach for using benchmarking is to start with
process benchmarking (i.e. identifying best practices and processes to implement these). This should be followed by performance benchmarking, which measures the gaps between processes followed
www.lifesciencesmagazines.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44