Search results

Current health care quality performance indicators appear to be inadequate to inform the public to make the right choices. The aim of this paper is to define a framework and an organizational setting in which valid and reliable healthcare information can be produced to inform the general public about healthcare quality.

To improve health care quality information, the paper explores the analogy between financial accounting, which aims to produce valid and reliable information to support companies informing their shareholders and stakeholders, and healthcare aiming to inform future patients about healthcare quality. Based on this analogy, the authors suggest a measurement framework and an organizational setting to produce healthcare information.

The authors suggest a five‐quality element framework to structure quality reporting. The authors also indicate the best way to report each type of quality, comparing performance indicators with certification/accreditation. Health gain is the most relevant quality indicator to inform the public, but this information is the most difficult to obtain. Finally, the organizational setting, comparable to financial accounting, required to provide valid, reliable and objective information on healthcare quality is described.

Framework elements should be tested in quantitative studies or case studies, such as a performance indicator's relative value compared to accreditation/ certification. There are, however, elements that can be implemented right away such as third party validation of healthcare information produced by healthcare institutions.

Given the money spent on healthcare worldwide, valid and reliable healthcare quality information's value can never be overestimated. It can justify delivering “expensive” healthcare, but also points the way to savings by stopping useless healthcare. Valid and reliable information puts the patient in the driver's seat and enables him or her to make the right decision when choosing their healthcare provider.

Lean Six Sigma (LSS) is a continuous improvement methodology used to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of processes. Although there are several articles published, only two have analyzed the literature from a bibliometrics perspective. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the LSS literature by bibliometrics, identifying its state of the art, scientific gaps and research trends.

Articles published up to 2016 in the database Scopus were investigated to identify the most significant articles, authors, journals, institutions and countries based on citation counting as well as the most frequent keywords and subject areas on LSS. Articles published in 2014, 2015 and 2016 were analyzed to point out scientific gaps and to identify eight main research trends on LSS.

The research trends are: “LSS implementation”, “Healthcare”, “LSS tools”, “Human factors”, “Expansion of results”, “SME”, “LSS combined with other methodologies” and “Education”. The research outcomes also point out the most significant articles, authors, journals, institutions and countries in LSS literature.

This research contributes to develop the state of the art of LSS and helps professionals as well as researchers to identify which issues new studies should address.

The performance of the literature is measured based on the number of citations and not on the number of published papers, and the bibliometric analysis covers the highest number of articles so far (319 articles). Besides, the identification of the main research trends on LSS is exclusively based on the most recent studies.