Improving Patient Flow with Lean Methodology: A Case Study at the Montreal General Hospital Colorectal Department
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quebec healthcare institutions are facing an increase in patients’ request and asked to do more with less, impacting the healthcare staff by working harder and longer shifts. Despite efforts, waiting lists keep growing in number resulting in patients waiting long periods of time for a specific treatment. Lean methodologies, originally developed in the manufacturing industry, offer an alternative to do more with less. Lean focuses efforts on eliminating activities that do not add value from the patient perspective and builds more efficient processes to perform an activity. This thesis proposes the use of Lean methodologies to improve the patient flow throughout the colorectal department at the Montreal General Hospital located in Montreal Quebec. A detail examination of the current processes of the department is analyzed and a proposed system is discussed with the use of value stream mapping and Lean principles. After rigorous data collection and analysis, initial improvements in the capacity of the department will increase in the common flow and colonoscopy loop by 20 patients per week and 60 patients per week respectively. In addition, Lead time will significantly decrease; up to 25% in short procedures, 20% in colonoscopies and 10% in surgeries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it