PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15499806

Improving resource efficiency through management science.

Lee Revere·Ralph Roberts
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Optimal management of resources is a very complex and difficult task for healthcare systems. Nevertheless, healthcare providers can employ data-driven methodologies and management science tools, coupled with managerial insights, to significantly improve both their resource effectiveness and efficiency. Understanding the full technical complexities of management science models is a daunting task for healthcare managers, but they can be aided by the increased availability of management science software. Readily available software does not require extensive technical competencies and is easily adaptable to resource changes. This article reports how a large healthcare system improved the cost effectiveness and service efficiency of its laboratory courier service through the use of management science techniques and readily available software. The laboratory courier system existed to serve a large multihospital healthcare system located in a major Texas metropolis. The routing and scheduling solution reported in this article yielded a very substantial 16.4 percent reduction in annual laboratory courier costs and a significant improvement in service levels. This study indicates that management science techniques and software are readily adaptable to the healthcare environment and are amenable to use by healthcare administrators.

Explore related subjects

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareEfficiency, OrganizationalTexasJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lee Revere, Ralph Roberts. Improving resource efficiency through management science.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15499806/

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Impacts and responses to sea-level rise: a global analysis of the SRES scenarios over the twenty-first century.

Taking the Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES) climate and socio-economic scenarios (A1FI, A2, B1 and B2 'future worlds'), the potential impacts of sea-level rise through the twenty-first century are explored using complementary impact and economic analysis methods at the global scale. These methods have never been explored together previously. In all scenarios, the exposure and hence the impact potential due to increased flooding by sea-level rise increases significantly compared to the base year (1990). While mitigation reduces impacts, due to the lagged response of sea-level rise to atmospheric temperature rise, impacts cannot be avoided during the twenty-first century by this response alone. Cost-benefit analyses suggest that widespread protection will be an economically rational response to land loss due to sea-level rise in the four SRES futures that are considered. The most vulnerable future worlds to sea-level rise appear to be the A2 and B2 scenarios, which primarily reflects differences in the socio-economic situation (coastal population, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and GDP/capita), rather than the magnitude of sea-level rise. Small islands and deltaic settings stand out as being more vulnerable as shown in many earlier analyses. Collectively, these results suggest that human societies will have more choice in how they respond to sea-level rise than is often assumed. However, this conclusion needs to be tempered by recognition that we still do not understand these choices and significant impacts remain possible. Future worlds which experience larger rises in sea-level than considered here (above 35 cm), more extreme events, a reactive rather than proactive approach to adaptation, and where GDP growth is slower or more unequal than in the SRES futures remain a concern. There is considerable scope for further research to better understand these diverse issues.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2006

Direct costs of three models for the screening of latent tuberculosis infection.

The aim of the present study was to compare the direct costs of three models for detection of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in routine clinical practice in Switzerland. Comparison of the overall costs of screening for LTBI, including medical and radiological examination, and preventive treatment associated with three screening models was carried out. Model 1 relies only on the tuberculin skin test (TST) according to the current national guidelines, model 2 relies on T-SPOT.TB (Oxford Immunotec, Oxford, UK) only and model 3 relies on TST followed by confirmation of positive results by T-SPOT.TB. Costs were taken directly from the clinic's figures. Clinical assumptions were based on the 267 patients who were referred to the clinic over the study period. Model 3 was found to be the most cost-effective. Using only the skin test (model 1) was the least cost-effective. If only one test for LTBI is to be used, then model 2 (using T-SPOT.TB only) is cheaper than using the TST (model 1). Screening for latent tuberculosis infection by tuberculin skin test followed by confirmation with T-SPOT.TB is less costly than screening with tuberculin skin test alone, as it allows a reduction in the number of people who receive preventive treatment. In groups with a high proportion of negative tuberculin skin tests, screening with T-SPOT.TB test only may be the most cost-effective.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗