Making cars and making health care: a critical review
Author: Linda E Shields
Published online: 1 March 2010
To the Editor: As one who works in paediatrics and sees parents bringing their children to hospital for day surgery, and then taking them home again a few hours later, I concur with Winch and Henderson in their critique of “lean thinking” ways of delivering health care.1
Nowhere is this more obvious, and nowhere is it applied with less critical assessment, than in day admissions. This process, which we are told is best for families, may not be. It is best for the hospital, of course, as it means that care can be delivered for a fraction of the cost of keeping people in for several days. But is it best for families? What are we doing to parents when we send them home with a child fresh from surgery? While we might give them some education about what to do if the child has an adverse event, there is not enough time to make sure the parents have understood, are able to read effectively, and have taken any information on board (with their ability to do so potentially hampered by their state of anxiety).
How do we know what the infection rates are after surgery? If the child develops an infection, the parents are likely to take the child to a general practitioner rather than return to the hospital, and busy GPs may not report back to the hospital on the child’s visit and the need for treatment.
We do not ask parents what financial burden we are placing on them. Have they taken days off work or used their holiday time to look after the child? Does that mean financial hardship for the family? Do we ask them what emotional burden it is placing on them? As a highly educated health professional who knows the ropes, I can only imagine how anxious young parents must be with a child who has just had an operation and for whom there is no health care support at home.
Of course, my comments about children are just as salient for adult day surgery admissions. I believe that lean thinking and its penultimate expression in health delivery, the day admission, should be critically re-examined, and there needs to be much more research on the immediate and long-term effects on patients and their families.
References
- Winch S, Henderson AJ. Making cars and making health care: a critical review. Med J Aust 2009; 191: 28-29. 0_CEEDDGFI
Getting on the Same Page: Why Australia Needs a National Maternity Early Warning System (MEWS) Chart
Briony A. Cutts, Lucy Bowyer, Nisha Khot, Sandra Lowe, Stefan C. Kane
Data for Equity: Can Linked Administrative Data Inform Pathways to More Equitable Child Health?
Sarah Gray, Shuaijun Guo, Meredith O'Connor, Elodie O'Connor, Katrina Williams, Hannah Badland, Susan Woolfenden, Josie Dickerson, Gerry Redmond, Marnie Downes, Sharon R. Goldfeld
Specialty College Selection: Why Change is Critical to Support a Future Rural Workforce
Matthew R. McGrail, Jenny May AM, Katherine Logan
The number of cancer‐related deaths that could be attributable to spatial disparities in survival in Australia, 2010–2019: a retrospective population‐based cohort study
Charlotte K Bainomugisa, Jessica Cameron, Paramita Dasgupta, Peter Baade
Differentiated and simplified oral HIV pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) models hold the key to virtually eliminating HIV transmission in Australia by 2030
Tyson Arapali, Sarah Warzywoda, Anthony K J Smith, Curtis Chan, Timothy R Broady, Erin Sullivan, Catherine MacPhail, Mohamed A Hammoud, Alexander Dowell‐Day, Benjamin R Bavinton
Non‐technical errors associated with deaths in surgical care, Australia, 2012–2019, by surgical specialty (Australian and New Zealand Audit of Surgical Mortality): a retrospective cohort study
Jesse Ey, Victoria Kollias, Octavia Lee, Kelly Hou, Matheesha Herath, John B North, Ellie Treloar, Suzanne Edwards, Martin Bruening, Adam J Wells, Guy J Maddern