APPLICATION OF THE SIX SIGMA DMAIC FRAMEWORK TO ENHANCE THE EFFICIENCY OF DENTAL HISTOPATHOLOGY REPORTING IN A TERTIARY-CARE HOSPITAL: A COLLABORATIVE DENTAL–PATHOLOGY DEPARTMENT QUALITY IMPROVEMENT STUDY
Main Article Content
Keywords
: DMAIC, Dental histopathology, Interdepartmental collaboration, Pathology workflow, Quality improvement, Six Sigma, Turnaround time
Abstract
Background:
Turnaround time (TAT) is a critical indicator of the efficiency and quality of histopathological laboratories. In dental and oral biopsy workflows, process variability, delayed specimen dispatch, and communication gaps often result in prolonged reporting times.
Aim:
To improve the efficiency and quality of dental histopathology reporting using the Six Sigma DMAIC (Define–Measure–Analyze–Improve–Control) methodology through collaborative engagement between dental and pathology departments.
Methods:
This prospective interventional study was conducted over one year at a tertiary-care teaching hospital. The baseline TAT performance for 90 dental biopsy cases was analyzed to identify key process bottlenecks using Pareto and Ishikawa analyses. Targeted interventions, including fixed specimen dispatch schedules, dedicated grossing slots, revised requisition forms, and a real-time TAT monitoring dashboard, were implemented. Post-intervention data from 150 cases were compared using the t-test and Chi-square analysis.
Results:
The mean TAT reduced from 5.0 ± 1.2 days to 3.4 ± 0.9 days (p-value < 0.001), achieving a 32% improvement. Reports issued within the institutional target (≤ 5 days) increased from 58.8% to 91.3% and the process sigma level improved from 2.8 to 3.7, indicating a significant reduction in variation and defects. The control charts confirmed sustained stability over six months.
Conclusion: The Six Sigma DMAIC approach, when applied through a collaborative Dental -Pathology Department framework, effectively optimized workflow efficiency, reduced delays, and enhanced reporting reliability in dental histopathology. This cost-effective, data-driven, replicable approach can serve as a benchmark for quality improvement across other pathology disciplines
References
2. Atanda AT, Yusuf I, Haruna MS. Perceived and real histopathology turnaround time: A teaching hospital experience. Niger J Surg. 2017;23(2):98–102. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5649437/
3. Volmar KE, Idowu MO, Souers RJ, Karcher DS, Nakhleh RE. Turnaround time for large or complex specimens in surgical pathology: A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 56 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2015;139(2):171–177.
4. Jerjes W, Upile T, Radhi H, Petrie A, Adams A, Callear J, et al. Delay in pathological tissue processing time vs. mortality in oral cancer: Short communication. Head Neck Oncol. 2012;4(1):14. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles
/PMC3414778/
5. Patel S, Smith JB, Kurbatova E, Guarner J. Factors that impact turnaround time of surgical pathology specimens in an academic institution. Hum Pathol. 2012;43(9):1501–1505. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22406373/
6. Rao S, Masilamani S, Sundaram S, Duvuru P, Swaminathan R. Quality measures in the pre-analytical phase of tissue processing: Understanding its value in histopathology. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(1):EC07–EC11. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi .nlm.nih.gov/26894071/
7. Westgard JO. Six Sigma Quality Design and Control. Madison (WI): Westgard QC, Inc.; 2006. p. 338.
8. Does RJMM, de Mast J. Six Sigma Method. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online. 2023;1–2. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK589666/
9. McDermott O, Antony J, Bhat S, Jayaraman R, Rosa A, Marolla G, et al. Lean Six Sigma in healthcare: A systematic literature review on challenges, organisational readiness, and critical success factors. Processes. 2022;10(10):1945. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9717/10/10/1945
10. Suman G, Prajapati DR. Utilization of Lean and Six Sigma quality initiatives in the Indian healthcare sector. PLoS One. 2021;16(12):e0261747. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8699985/
11. Alshieban S, Al-Surimi K. Reducing turnaround time of surgical pathology reports in pathology and laboratory medicine departments. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2015;4(1):u209223.w3773. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4693096/
12. Cristaldi A, Fernandez G, Jimenez M, Tagle G, Lauriola P, Machado G, et al. Lean Six Sigma: Application of the methodology in data processing for cancer registry. Med Sci Forum. 2023;19(1):12. [cited 2025 Oct 24]. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-9992/19/1/12
13. National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL). Specific Criteria for Accreditation of Medical Laboratories. New Delhi: NABL; 2019.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dr. Firoz Sheikh
Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, Raipur Institute of Medical Sciences, Raipur, Chhattisgarh- India
Dr. Dilshad Quraishi
Assistant Professor, Department of Dentistry, Raipur Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS), Raipur, Chhattisgarh- India
Dr. Chandni Krishnani
Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, Raipur Institute of Medical Sciences, Raipur, Chhattisgarh- India
Dr. Abhishek Agrawal
Professor, Department of Dentistry, Raipur Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS), Raipur, Chhattisgarh- India