Cargando…
Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process
The Six Sigma methodology has been widely implemented in industry, healthcare, and laboratory medicine since the mid-1980s. The performance of a process is evaluated by the sigma metric (SM), and 6 sigma represents world class performance, which implies that only 3.4 or less defects (or errors) per...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6999184/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32063732 http://dx.doi.org/10.11613/BM.2020.010901 |
_version_ | 1783493938418548736 |
---|---|
author | Coskun, Abdurrahman Ialongo, Cristiano |
author_facet | Coskun, Abdurrahman Ialongo, Cristiano |
author_sort | Coskun, Abdurrahman |
collection | PubMed |
description | The Six Sigma methodology has been widely implemented in industry, healthcare, and laboratory medicine since the mid-1980s. The performance of a process is evaluated by the sigma metric (SM), and 6 sigma represents world class performance, which implies that only 3.4 or less defects (or errors) per million opportunities (DPMO) are expected to occur. However, statistically, 6 sigma corresponds to 0.002 DPMO rather than 3.4 DPMO. The reason for this difference is the introduction of a 1.5 standard deviation (SD) shift to account for the random variation of the process around its target. In contrast, a 1.5 SD shift should be taken into account for normally distributed data, such as the analytical phase of the total testing process; in practice, this shift has been included in all type of calculations related to SM including non-normally distributed data. This causes great deviation of the SM from the actual level. To ensure that the SM value accurately reflects process performance, we concluded that a 1.5 SD shift should be used where it is necessary and formally appropriate. Additionally, 1.5 SD shift should not be considered as a constant parameter automatically included in all calculations related to SM. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6999184 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69991842020-02-15 Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process Coskun, Abdurrahman Ialongo, Cristiano Biochem Med (Zagreb) Short Communication The Six Sigma methodology has been widely implemented in industry, healthcare, and laboratory medicine since the mid-1980s. The performance of a process is evaluated by the sigma metric (SM), and 6 sigma represents world class performance, which implies that only 3.4 or less defects (or errors) per million opportunities (DPMO) are expected to occur. However, statistically, 6 sigma corresponds to 0.002 DPMO rather than 3.4 DPMO. The reason for this difference is the introduction of a 1.5 standard deviation (SD) shift to account for the random variation of the process around its target. In contrast, a 1.5 SD shift should be taken into account for normally distributed data, such as the analytical phase of the total testing process; in practice, this shift has been included in all type of calculations related to SM including non-normally distributed data. This causes great deviation of the SM from the actual level. To ensure that the SM value accurately reflects process performance, we concluded that a 1.5 SD shift should be used where it is necessary and formally appropriate. Additionally, 1.5 SD shift should not be considered as a constant parameter automatically included in all calculations related to SM. Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine 2020-02-15 2020-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6999184/ /pubmed/32063732 http://dx.doi.org/10.11613/BM.2020.010901 Text en Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Short Communication Coskun, Abdurrahman Ialongo, Cristiano Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process |
title | Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process |
title_full | Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process |
title_fullStr | Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process |
title_full_unstemmed | Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process |
title_short | Six Sigma revisited: We need evidence to include a 1.5 SD shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process |
title_sort | six sigma revisited: we need evidence to include a 1.5 sd shift in the extraanalytical phase of the total testing process |
topic | Short Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6999184/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32063732 http://dx.doi.org/10.11613/BM.2020.010901 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT coskunabdurrahman sixsigmarevisitedweneedevidencetoincludea15sdshiftintheextraanalyticalphaseofthetotaltestingprocess AT ialongocristiano sixsigmarevisitedweneedevidencetoincludea15sdshiftintheextraanalyticalphaseofthetotaltestingprocess |