PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10300209

PERT: a tool for better lab planning.

R O Valdiserri
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Program Evaluation and Review Technique was developed by the U.S. Navy in 1958. As a planning tool, it enables management to visualize any complicated task as a series of well-defined events. By estimating the time necessary to progress from one event to the next, planners can delineate a pathway of "critical events" and thus conserve personnel and technical resources. Here is a demonstration of how this management control technique could be used in a laboratory setting.

Explore related subjects

Hospital DepartmentsHospital Design and ConstructionPathology Department, HospitalPlanning TechniquesSystems AnalysisJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R O Valdiserri. 1985. PERT: a tool for better lab planning.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10300209/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Establishment of a stroke unit in a district hospital: review of experience.

BACKGROUND: The experience and outcomes of co-locating acute stroke and stroke rehabilitation care in a district hospital were reviewed. METHOD: Information for patients admitted to Blacktown and Mt Druitt Hospitals before and after setting up an acute stroke unit (SU) (12 months data for each period), including mortality and length of stay (LOS) at the hospital were obtained from various sources, including the diagnosis-related group and subacute and non-acute casemix databases. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction of mortality (18 vs 10%; P = 0.01) and reduced total LOS (46 vs 39 days; P = 0.01) with similar functional outcomes in the post-SU period. Fifty per cent of patients were unable to access the acute SU. Patients admitted into the SU had lower mortality (5 vs 14%; P = 0.01) and were also discharged from hospital earlier (35 vs 54 days; P = 0.01) than patients admitted into general wards during the post-SU period. Thirty-four per cent of patients received rehabilitation within the rehabilitation facility in the post-SU period compared with 19% in the pre-SU period. CONCLUSION: The Blacktown experience showed the feasibility of establishing a co-located SU within rehabilitation facility with good outcomes as illustrated by the significant reduction in the stroke mortality, a reduction in the total LOS and an increase in the number of patients receiving rehabilitation post-stroke.

Hospital Departments↗