View
6
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
Fundamentals of Mistake‐Proofing Your Operation
Lab Quality Confab Conference November 7, 2012
Presented by M. Susan Stegall, Owner and CEO
M. S. Stegall & Associates, LLC
A Management Consulting Firm
11/12/2012 1Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
My Personal Interest in This Topic—To Err Is Human
As an administrative director of laboratory services in the 1980s, my hospital had a patient die during surgery from the transfusion of an ABO incompatible unit of blood.
Lessons learned: Your laboratory is only as strong as your
operating processes’ weakest link, The trick is in identifying that weakest
link, preferably before an adverse patient outcome, and
Then doing something about it that will prevent it from ever happening, i.e., preventing the failure mode in this example.
11/12/2012 2
Value of a human life is estimated at $5 M. (Google inquiry)
2
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Presentation Flow
Introduction and Background—Patient Safety
Learning Objectives
Key definitions within the “Path of Flow”
Identifying Opportunities for Mistake Proofing
Who drives a mistaking‐proofing initiative
Integrating mistake‐proofing into your current operations
Developing the business case for mistake‐proofing
Quality tool approaches to mistake proofing
Multiple choice quiz
Selected Bibliography
Case study exercise—teams use quality tools
Certificate of completion
11/12/2012 3
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Learning Objectives for You
Attendees will learn:1. Key definitions of mistake‐proofing plus other terms2. How to identify opportunities for mistake‐proofing
Reactive—mistake proofing Proactive—error proofing
3. Who needs to drive mistake‐proofing initiatives4. How to integrate mistake‐proofing initiatives into your current
operations5. How to identify and develop the business case for mistake‐
proofing6. Quality tools that are useful in mistake‐proofing your processes7. Team exercise: Learning the power of “First Pass Yield” to
monitor error‐proofing successes plus use of other improvement tools.
11/12/2012 4
3
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Background to Mistake Proofing—Focus Is on the Patients!
Institute of Medicine 2000 Report: To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System
Extrapolated model implied a range of deaths during inpatient admission in the U.S. between 44,000 and 98,000 from preventable medical errors.
“Don’t Kill Me! What I Want From the Health‐Care System” Author of Potent Medicine: The Collaborative Cure for Healthcare by John Toussaint, MD
1. Don’t Kill Me—hospital related deaths rated by some at No.6 cause of all deaths.
2. Keep Me Healthy
3. Don’t Keep Me in the Dark
11/12/2012 5
http://www.cnbc.com/id/48608480/
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
10 Shocking Medical Mistakes by John Bonifield, CNN and
Elizabeth Cohen, CNN Senior Medical Correspondent (June 2012)
1. Treating the wrong patient
2. Surgical souvenirs
3. Lost patient
4. Fake doctors
5. The ER waiting game
6. Air bubbles after chest tube removed
7. Operating on the wrong body part
8. Infection infestation
9. Lookalike tubes—chest & stomach
10. Waking up during surgery
11/12/2012 6
Laboratory equivalent =WBIT = Wrong Blood in Tube
4
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Deaths Avoidable through Health Care—U.S. Lags Behind Three European Countries
11/12/2012 7
E. Nolte and C. M. McKee, "In Amenable Mortality—Deaths Avoidable Through Health Care—Progress in the US Lags That of Three European Countries," Health Affairs Web First, published online Aug. 29, 2012.
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Key Definitions
Defects are an “outcome” generated by a process and should be considered the problem you are attempting to solve using a variety of quality tools.
Errors And Mistakes that occur during a process are causes of the defects and should be the focus of the analysis and subsequent error‐proofing process improvement.
Zero Quality Control (ZQC): Is a quality control approach for achieving zero defects. ZQC assumes that defects are prevented by controlling the performance of a process so that it cannot produce a defect—even when a mistake is made by a machine or a person.
First Pass Yield—First pass yield is a measure to evaluate the initial efficiency of a multistep production process.
11/12/2012 8
5
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Key Definitions (cont.)
Root Cause Problem Solving—Attempts to solve problems by attempting to identify and then correct the root causes of events, as opposed to simply addressing their symptoms.
Pareto Chart—A bar graph. The length of the bars represent frequency or cost (money or time) arranged in order from longest on the left to shortest on the right. May include actual counts and percentages along with a cumulative line.
5 Whys—The key is to encourage the trouble‐shooter to avoid assumptions and logic traps and instead trace the chain of causality in direct increments from the effect through any layers of abstraction to a root cause that still has some connection to the original problem. Note that the fifth why suggests a broken process or an alterable behavior, which is typical of reaching the root‐cause level.
11/12/2012 9
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Key Definitions (cont.)
Deductive Reasoning—Method of reasoning from general to particular, it is employed in deriving general laws or principles from the observed phenomenon.
Convergent Thinking—Thinking that brings together information focused on solving a problem (especially solving problems that have a single correct solution)
Divergent Thinking—Thinking that moves away in diverging directions so as to involve a variety of aspects and which sometimes lead to novel ideas and solutions; associated with creativity.
11/12/2012 10
6
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Synonyms—Mistake
Error Fault Blunder Slip‐up Slip Gaffe Inaccuracy Oversight Misstep Blooper Underestimate
Lapse Faux pas Muddle Confuse with Mix up Fail to appreciate Misunderstand Misjudge Misinterpret Misconstrue Confuse
11/12/2012 11
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
How to Identify Opportunities for “Mistake‐proofing”
FOUR INSPECTION METHODS
JUDGEMENT INSPECTIONS:
DISCOVER DEFECTS
GOOD VS. BAD
INFORMATIVE INSPECTIONS:
REDUCE DEFECTS
STATISTICAL QUALITY CONTROL
SOURCE INSPECTIONS:
ELIMINATE DEFECTS
QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS BEFORE OR AFTER EACH
STEP
SOURCE OBSERVATIONS:
PREVENT DEFECTS
ERROR PROOF DESIGN
ZERO QUALITY CONTROL
11/12/2012 12
7
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Evolution to Zero QC MethodShigeo Shingo’s Book
Zero Quality Control: Source Inspection and the Poka‐yoke System
Baseline Stage: Judgment inspections
Stage 1: Statistical Quality Control—Informative inspections—Reduces defects
Stage 2: Encounter with Poka Yoke Methods (Mistake‐proofing)—find it and fix it: Eliminates the opportunity to create defects
Stage 3: Encounter with successive and self‐checks
Stage 4: Sampling Inspections—Rational
Stage 5: Encounter with Source Inspection
Stage 6: The achievement of a month with Zero Defects
11/12/2012 13
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Inspection versus Prevention
Inspection—Reactive Prevention—Proactive
11/12/2012 14
8
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Countermeasures—Remedies:General Principles
1. Eliminate—error is impossible by design
2. Control against mistake by physical means
3. Mitigate the consequences of the error
4. Enhance the detectability of the mistake
5. Institute procedural pathways for guidance to prevent errors
6. Maintain supervisory control and monitoring for mistakes
7. Provide posted instructions—specific, brief & clear to avoid errors
8. Use training to ensure correct procedures are known
9. Provide technical manuals within the operating environment
10. Provide warning signs
11. Provide personal protective and other safety equipment when and where needed
12. Assume there is risk in your operation and provide insurance, a recall policy, and a public relations plan.
11/12/2012 15Least effective Effectiveness
Most effective
Source: Human Error by George A Peters and Barbara J. Peters, pages 61 and 62.
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Mistake‐Proofing—Who’s Responsible and How to Integrate
Who’s Responsible: How to Integrate It:
11/12/2012 16
9
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Goals of Mistake‐proofing
Patient Safety
Employee Safety
Visitor Safety
Waste Reduction
11/12/2012 17
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Examples
Laboratory Automation—Pre‐analytical (Moto Man website)
Laboratory Automation—Analytical (From Dark Daily)
11/12/2012 18
10
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Examples
Inventory Management and Rotation Fire Alarms
11/12/2012 19
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Mistake Proofing Devises Are Prevalent in Everyday Life & in
Laboratory Medicine
Types:
Everyday life—road signs, car keys, flash drives
Sensory devices—refrigerator beeps if left open
Warning devices—blind spot warning indicator in newer model cars & SUVs
Shut down devices—safety handle on push mowers and riding mowers
Additional examples:
Limit switches
Proximity sensors
Laser displacement sensor
Vision systems
Counters and timers
Photoelectric sensors
Ultrasonic sensors
Process measurement instruments
Specialty sensors
11/12/2012 20
11
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Business Case for Mistake‐proofing
Quantify the wasted resources, financially. Here are a few examples:
Staff members time spent looking for specimens
Staff members time spent acquiring missing patient and billing demographics
Cost of repeat analytical runs—Labor, supplies, reagents, QC materials
Lost clients due to poor quality
Cost of adding a missed order
Staff and supervisory time spent on performing quality checks at the end of accessioning requisitions
Staff members time spent on customer complaints
Patient safety impact—impact outside the lab silo11/12/2012 21
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Business Case: Mistake ProofingResults of Henry Ford Health System—
Do No Harm Program
Documented cost savings of harm prevention—a patient safety goal:
Eliminate pressure ulcers by using the right kind of mattress—saved $10.6 M over 3 years
Preventing urinary infections—saved $5M over 4 years
Malpractice insurance decreases of $26M by reducing patient mortality rates down to 1.4% (a 30% plus reduction)
Source: ASQ Webinar, September 2012
11/12/2012 22
12
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Lean Six Sigma Tools
Tool 1: First Pass Yield
Tool 2: Pareto Chart
Tool 3: Cause & Effect Investigation
Tool 4: PDCA—Error Proofing Plan Using Lean ZQC as goal Zero Quality Control
Source inspection
Poka‐yoke system• Mistake Proofing
• Error Proofing
11/12/2012 23
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Tool 1: First Pass Yield—Current State Inspection
11/12/2012 24
Path of Flow Value‐adding Process Steps Input measure
Unit
Count/Day Defects/Day
Defects÷Unit
Count/Day
Throughput Yield:
1‐Defects %
Calculation‐‐
Division
Calculation‐‐
Subtraction
Pre‐analytical Accessioning Cases 65.00 5.00 0.07692 1.00000 0.92308
Pre‐analytical Test Selection Cases 65.00 1.00 0.01538 1.00000 0.98462
Pre‐analytical Ordering‐‐data entry Cases 65.00 3.00 0.04615 1.00000 0.95385
Analytical Histology Cases 65.00 4.00 0.06154 1.00000 0.93846
Analytical IHC Antibody Runs 25.00 2.00 0.08000 1.00000 0.92000
Analytical Sign Out (Slide Review) Cases 65.00 1.00 0.01538 1.00000 0.98462
Analytical Additional test selection Cases 5.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Reporting‐‐Computer entry IHC Results 200.00 20.00 0.10000 1.00000 0.90000
Analytical Transcription Cases 35.00 2.00 0.05714 1.00000 0.94286
Post‐analytical Verification Cases 65.00 1.00 0.01538 1.00000 0.98462
Post‐analytical Report distribution Cases 70.00 1.00 0.01429 1.00000 0.98571
60.70%
Calculation‐‐
Multiplication
First Pass Yield‐‐Current State
First Pass Yield‐‐‐‐‐>
13
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Tool 1: First Pass Yield—with Defect Reduction: Feedback Loop
11/12/2012 25
Path of Flow Value‐adding Process Steps Input measure
Unit
Count/Day Defects/Day
Defects÷Unit
Count/Day
Throughput Yield:
1‐Defects %
Calculation‐‐
Division
Calculation‐‐
Subtraction
Pre‐analytical Accessioning Cases 65.00 5.00 0.07692 1.00000 0.92308
Pre‐analytical Test Selection Cases 65.00 1.00 0.01538 1.00000 0.98462
Pre‐analytical Ordering‐‐data entry Cases 65.00 3.00 0.04615 1.00000 0.95385
Analytical Histology Cases 65.00 4.00 0.06154 1.00000 0.93846
Analytical IHC Antibody Runs 25.00 2.00 0.08000 1.00000 0.92000
Analytical Sign Out (Slide Review) Cases 65.00 1.00 0.01538 1.00000 0.98462
Analytical Additional test selection Cases 5.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Reporting‐‐Computer entry IHC Results 200.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Transcription Cases 35.00 2.00 0.05714 1.00000 0.94286
Post‐analytical Verification Cases 65.00 1.00 0.01538 1.00000 0.98462
Post‐analytical Report distribution Cases 70.00 1.00 0.01429 1.00000 0.98571
67.44%
Calculation‐‐
Multiplication
First Pass Yield‐‐Defects Reduced
First Pass Yield‐‐‐‐‐>
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Tool 1: First Pass Yield—with Error Elimination, a.k.a. Success Every Time
11/12/2012 26
Path of Flow Value‐adding Process Steps Input measure Unit Count/Day Defects/Day
Defects÷Unit
Count/Day
Throughput Yield:
1‐Defects %
Calculation‐‐
Division
Calculation‐‐
Subtraction
Pre‐analytical Accessioning Cases 65.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Pre‐analytical Test Selection Cases 65.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Pre‐analytical Ordering‐‐data entry Cases 65.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Histology Cases 65.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical IHC Antibody Runs 25.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Sign Out (Slide Review) Cases 65.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Additional test selection Cases 5.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Reporting‐‐Computer entry IHC Results 200.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Analytical Transcription Cases 35.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Post‐analytical Verification Cases 65.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
Post‐analytical Report distribution Cases 70.00 ‐ ‐ 1.00000 1.00000
100.00%Calculation‐‐
Multiplication
First Pass Yield: Mistake‐proofing
First Pass Yield‐‐‐‐‐>
14
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Tool 1: First Pass Yield Dashboard Summary
Baseline metric = 60.70%
With error reduction (SQC) = 67.44%
With error elimination (ZQC) = 100%
11/12/2012 27
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Pareto Chart
11/12/2012 28
15
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Fishbone Diagram
11/12/2012 29
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Fishbone Cause and Effect Diagram
11/12/2012 30
Goal: Mistake‐
Proofing IHC Reporting
MachinesMethods
People
Materials Environment
Measures
16
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Brainstorm People as a Causative Agent
5 Whys—Root Cause Exploration
POOR TRAINING
Measure it!
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
OVERBURDENED
Prove it!
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
SHORT STAFFED
Measure it!
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
11/12/2012 31
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Brainstorm Methods as a Causative Agent
5 Whys—Root Cause Exploration
Manually Transpose Results from Score Sheet
Measure it!
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
OVERBURDENED—BIG SPECIMEN DUMPS
Prove it!
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
EVERY ORDER IS AN EXCEPTION
Measure it!
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
11/12/2012 32
17
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Mistake‐proofing Solutions
Error Prevention Solutions
Measurement proved that the transcription from paper score card was the root cause of this problem.
Mistake‐proofing solution:1. Eliminate paper score card
2. Pathologist enters results directly into the computer as they interpret the IHC results.
Evidence‐based critical thinking
11/12/2012 33
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Rapid Process Improvement—PDCA or Kaizen
Plan: Computerize the IHC scoring Train pathologists on the new
resulting screens Train pathologists on the verification
step.
Do: Communicate and implement
Check: For problems and revise new process
till it stabilizes.
Act: Institutionalize the changed
procedure; Affirm that the new process has
eliminated the transcription errors.
11/12/2012 34
18
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Multiple Choice Quiz
Which of the following Lean wastes is the focus of error‐proofing?
1. Overproduction
2. Inventory
3. Defects
4. Transportation
5. Motion
6. Foregone talent
7. Over processing
8. Waiting
Classify these mistake proofing actions as reactive or proactive:
A. Liquid sensors on chemistry & hematology analyzers
B. Metal detectors at airport screening
C. Barcode readers for reagent packages placed on instruments
D. A delta check of >24% on a chemistry profile—suspecting WBIT (wrong blood in tube).
11/12/2012 35
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Multiple Choice Quiz (cont.)
Does ZQC infer that statistical quality control is not required—the entire process has been error‐proofed?
Yes
No
Which of the following Lean Six Sigma tools could you also use to error‐proof a process?
a) Failure mode affects analysis (Six Sigma)
b) A3 Analysis (Lean)
c) DMAIC (Six Sigma)
d) Value Stream Mapping (Lean)
e) None of the above
f) All of the above
The business case for error‐proofing may include which of the following:
a. Labor savings
b. Productivity improvements
c. Investment costs
d. Customer satisfaction improvement
e. Improvement in patient safety
f. All of the above
11/12/2012 36
19
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Multiple Choice Quiz (cont.)
Name one good and one poor countermeasure used to prevent human errors in laboratories today.
11/12/2012 37
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Case Study Exercise
11/12/2012 38
20
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Case Study Exercise for the Fundamentals of Mistake‐Proofing Presentation at Lab Quality Confab 2012
Task 1: Calculate “First Pass Yield” Current State based on the information on the right. See form provided
Task 2: Develop “Pareto Chart” using the various errors listed within your current state “First Pass Yield” model.
Note: The defects should be sorted highest frequency to lowest frequency on your bar‐graph chart
Task 3: Brainstorm An Error‐Proofing Solutions and Summarizeyour team’s Plan:
Kaizen Event aimed at error‐proofing the cause of the major defect listed on your Pareto Chart.
Task 4: Recast your “First Pass Yield” based on the expected change in frequency for the error you selected to eliminate.
Task 5: Team Presentations: 5 Minutes for Each Team
11/12/2012 39
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Case Study Exercise—Case Study Scenario:
1. The Lab: Hospital‐based outreach testing. The Path of flow is as follows:2. Physician office ordering using paper requisitions—defect input measure is
requisitions3. Specimen draw—defect input measure is missing specimens4. Courier transport—defect is missing specimen shipment bags5. Delivery receipt—defect input measure is # of mismatched specimens/requisition
order6. Data entry—defect input measure is incorrect data elements (Averages 15 data
inputs/requisition)7. Specimen processing & sorting—defect input measure is # of problem specimens
that require a customer call8. Automated instrument Testing—defect input measure is number of specimens that
do not auto verify9. Resolve/Retest Technical Limit And Delta Check Samples—defect is number of
specimens that cannot be resolved and reported (Requires redraw)10. Report distribution—defects input measure is the number of reports that are not
printed within 24 hours and delivered.
11/12/2012 40
21
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Case Study Exercise—Data
11/12/2012 41
Path of Flow Process Steps Model Input measure Average Unit
Count/Day
Average
Defects/Day
Pre, Pre‐analytical Ordering using Requisition Requisition 2,500 250
Pre‐analytical
Obtain Patient Specimen at
Physician Office or Patient Service
Center
Specimens 7,500 80
Pre‐analyticalTransport Patient requisition &
specimens via CourierBio Bags 2,500 13
Pre‐analytical Specimen Delivery Receipt Requisitions & Specimens 7,500 200
Pre‐analyticalData entry‐‐Demographics & Test
OrdersRequisitions ‐‐15 Data elem 37,500 5,625
Pre‐analytical Specimen Processing & Sorting Specimens 7,500 150
AnalyticalAutomated Instrument Testing &
Auto VerificationSpecimens 7,500 200
AnalyticalResolve Technical limit and Delta
check Patient samplesSpecimens (Average 5%) 375 20
Post‐analyticalReport distribution‐‐paper copies
onlyReports 7,500 30
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Selected Bibliography
Casey, John J. Strategic Error‐Proofing. New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, a Productivity Press Book, 2009.
Burns, Joseph. Root Cause Analysis Used to Find Source of Errors. The Dark Report, Volume XIX, Number 12, August 27, 2012
Grout, PhD. John. Prepared for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Mistake‐Proofing the Design of Health Care Processes. Rockville, MD: AHRQ Publication No. 07‐0020, May 2007
Okes, Duke. Root Cause Analysis, the Core of Problem Solving and Corrective Action. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: ASQ Quality Press, 2009.
11/12/2012 42
22
Susan@msstegall-consulting.com | 330-337-6664 |http://www.msstegall-consulting.com
Selected Bibliography (cont.)
Peters, George A. and Peters, Barbara J. Human Error, Causes and Control. New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006
Created by the Productivity Press Development Team. Mistake‐Proofing for Operators: The ZQC System. Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, a Productivity Press Book, Reprinted 2010.
Straseski, PhD, Joely. Making Delta Checks an Essential Quality Improvement Tool. Presentation at G2 Intelligence, Lab Institute 2012. ARUP Laboratories, October 2012
Shingo, Shigeo as translated by Dillion, Andrew P. Zero Quality Control: Source Inspection and the Poka‐yoke System. Portland, Oregon: Productivity Press, 1986
11/12/2012 43
Recommended