ArticleBMJ open2025
Alignment and contribution of lean management practices to strategic objectives in a healthcare context: a qualitative study in a university medical centre.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study investigates how lean management (LM) practices align with and contribute to strategic objectives in healthcare using the congruence model as a conceptual framework.
designThis study employed a qualitative research design, integrating both inductive and deductive approaches. Data were collected from multiple hospital departments using primary and secondary sources. Primary data included semi-structured interviews, guided by a standardised interview protocol. Secondary data consisted of reports on courses of action, annual reports, policy documents and findings from exploratory meetings. The analysis involved iterative cycles of open coding, axial coding and selective coding to systematically identify and refine themes, supporting thematic analysis.
settingSix departments: Kidney and vascular surgery, Care core movement, Clinical department, Systemic diseases, Oncology, Care core Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary disease (HPB), which were part of one business unit within a tertiary care institution, a University Medical Centre in the Netherlands.
participants22 respondents aged 18 years or older were purposefully selected based on their organisational roles and LM experience. Respondents had to be involved in LM practices, which meant they had to understand LM and have passed at least one LM training programme, or they should be enrolled in a training course during the research.
resultsInterviewees identified several barriers to LM implementation, including insufficient management support for a culture of continuous improvement, limited time for LM projects, inadequate recognition from management and poor communication of strategic objectives. Despite positive individual experiences with LM projects, their contribution to strategic objectives was deemed limited due to these barriers. Specific challenges included an experienced lack of leadership commitment, inadequate follow-up on projects, insufficient resource allocation, limited access to training and leaders failing to acknowledge employee value. Facilitators of success were fostering a culture of continuous improvement, committed managers and providing training.
conclusionsLM practices have the potential to contribute to strategic objectives in healthcare organisations by reducing waste, improving patient care quality and optimising processes. However, their impact is constrained by organisational barriers and misalignments. Challenges such as insufficient resources, poor project follow-up, lack of management support and the absence of a continuous improvement culture minimise LM's effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.