3.8 Article

An exploratory study into the use of Lean Six Sigma to reduce medication errors in the Norwegian public healthcare context

Journal

LEADERSHIP IN HEALTH SERVICES
Volume 32, Issue 4, Pages 509-524

Publisher

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/LHS-12-2018-0065

Keywords

Lean Six Sigma; Norwegian public health care; Medication errors; Survey; Semi-structured interviews

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Medication errors are a significant cause of injury in Norwegian hospitals. The purpose of this study is to explore how Lean Six Sigma (LSS) has been used in the Norwegian public health-care context to reduce medication errors. Design/methodology/approach A mixed method approach was used to gather data from participants working in the four regions served by the Norway health authorities. A survey questionnaire was distributed to 38 health-care practitioners and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 health-care practitioners. Findings The study finds that the implementation of LSS in the Norwegian public health-care context is still in its infancy. This is amidst several challenges faced by Norwegian hospitals such as the lack of top-management support, lack of LSS training and coaching and a lack of awareness around the benefits of LSS in health care. Research limitations/implications - Because of the large geographical area, it was difficult to reach participants from all health regions in Norway. However, the study managed to assess the current status of LSS implementation through the participants' perspectives. This is a fruitful area for future research whereby an action research methodology could be used. Originality/value To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first empirical study into the use of LSS methodology in reducing medication errors. In addition, this study is valuable for health-care practitioners and professionals as a guideline to achieve the optimal benefit of LSS implementation to reduce medication errors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available