Advertisements
jump to navigation

RTLS Hospital Implementation February 15, 2013

Posted by Russ Arnett in Basic Risks, Projects and Risks, RTLS - Hospital Application, Universal Risks.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

Well we have provided the complete infrastructure to support the specific RTLS equipment for full coverage of the clinical areas.  We have two slelected Pilot areas that have been completed and have proved that the system does work as needed and expected.  The critical department is the Emergency Department. They need to know exactly where critical equipment is located. The RTLS system provides the location instantly and its specific location.

Along with the Pilot areas we also had to
be sure that the service (help desk) was fully in tune and trained on what this system did and it’s basic functions. We don’t expect many if any calls from end-users because the system is very intuitive.
We will be asking the Pilot areas to approve their implementation formally early next week.

We are committed to finishing the public training this weekend to allow the weekend clinical workers access and knowledge.

Overall the project is under budget and on schedule.

Advertisements

Review of RTLS Implementation Goals February 3, 2013

Posted by Russ Arnett in Projects and Risks, RTLS - Hospital Application.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

Due to unparalleled accuracy, TeleTracking provided and supported RTLS can reliably  deliver a hard ROI in less than a year in hospital environments:

  • PAR Level Tracking: Set the system to automatically alert staff if the last pump is removed from a supply room, or better yet, when the next-to-last pump is removed so that your staff will never have to search for equipment. PAR level tracking requires 100% room level accuracy.
  • Rental Management: Have the confidence to reduce excessive spares by knowing the minimum number of spares during the past month.
  • Utilization Rates: Generate alerts whenever used equipment is placed into a soiled utility room, and become aware of equipment shortages before they become critical.
  • Egress/Shrinkage Prevention: Generate an alert if expensive equipment approaches a building exit, or if it comes too close to the incinerator.
  • Reducing Equipment Search Times: Never worry about missing a piece of equipment during an equipment or software recalls, and make it easy to find all equipment before the preventative maintenance interval has expired. Gone are the days of exhaustively searching every room for that one missing pump!
  • Advanced Workflow Optimization: TeleTracking RTLS solution is one that integrates to its own patented XT System that supports workflow analysis or process optimization, such as patient flow, capacity management, bed management, infection and more.

RTLS -production risks January 25, 2013

Posted by Russ Arnett in Projects and Risks, RTLS - Hospital Application.
Tags: ,
add a comment

We know from the excitement of the clinical staff that the ability to quickly find a critical device is a major patient safety issue. The risks will identified as critical if the infrastructure has a failure.
We are developing some mitigation processes that I will share in future posts also sample documentation will be available for those who ask.
The failed devices will need to be isolated and reviewed locally as quickly as possible and if possible resolved by the local technical team. A major issue to be addressed is spares – should there be any kept locally or not? Configuration of these devices is complicated.
By the way this hospital in northern Arizona needs 2 PMP poject managers employees not consultant’s.
Contact me if interested

RTLS – Implementation Started October 15, 2012

Posted by Russ Arnett in RTLS - Hospital Application.
Tags: , , , , ,
add a comment

TeleTracking is the selected vendor – and they are a professional and knowledgeable vendor!  The basics have been completed which was to:

  • Identify and obtain the required server hardware – this system can use virtual server
  • Validate the technical requirements – great documentation that can be shared as needed with end-users
  • Obtain storage area for TeleTracking devices
  • Convert the Assets into spreadsheet format from the in-house Asset Tracking System (AIMS)

The next steps will to provide training on how to tag the various devices and do some actual activites with the hospital group so they understand and can fully participate.

While the above is in progress, the cable vendor is working its way through the hospital:

  • Installing cable
  • Installing Beacons
  • Installing Collectors

The installation activities will go through December, but as a section is completed, TeleTracking will do remote diagnostics to vallidate connectivity and equipment functioning.

A specific pilot is planned for the week of 10/22 – dependent on the capability of TeleTracking having the access to install a database instance on the hospitals server – (more later)

The project team so far has been working well together and all aspects of the project is meeting schedule and cost budgets.

Project Implementation – users not ready March 1, 2012

Posted by Russ Arnett in Projects and Risks.
Tags: ,
add a comment
The testing was successful, several steps and processes were tested and proved to be as required.
  • All user-id’s verified
  • Password processes verified and tested
  • Help desk trained and validated
  • Production feeds setup and communication lines verified
  • Reports reviewed and approved
  • Input data screens reviewed and approved

The requirements for the upgrade and implementation from the IT requirements have been met – but the problem is that the user has not been able to complete the several important work flow, documentation and training requirements.

It is expected that it could take up to two months for the business users to be able to get this completed.  We all know that because of this – there is a good chance that some IT processes may be required to change – and if so, then additional testing will be required.

Risks

  1. New process requirements may be discovered
  2. Budget could need to be expanded
  3. Business user may never decide to close project
  4. Test requirements may require additional system changes
  5. PMO may not agree to place project on hold

 

Any ideas or input?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Process Evaluation – February 25, 2012

Posted by Russ Arnett in Projects and Risks.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

In the process of discussing a potential assignment that in general will be to evaluate a current production system with the end result to provide an evaluation and suggestions on what to do to improve it.

One of the first requirements is to gain knowledge on what is the expectations of the current system and how does it fulfill those expectations.  The basic approach that comes to mind is to be able to have information about the vendor and related products that it provides and to develop additional information as well.  It should be questioned if another already installed system could replace it?

Of course the information of where else it is used and what competitors are in the market place and how do they measure up.  It is a WEB based – SQL .Net application – so interesting issues could abound.  Nothing was said at this point – but it would need to be asked – how critical is the system for day to day operations?

  1. Is the software being used the latest release?
  2. Is there a support/maintenance contract in place?
  3. What is the support history (response – customer support – etc.)
  4. Are the users trained?
  5. Has the work flow evolved to support the application?
  • Key information and basic data required
  1. Who are the “super users”
  2. Who are the casual users?
  3. What works well (in general)
  4. What does not work well (in general)
  • Some potential information required –
  1. Reports are correct?
  2. Speed of query results?
  3. Data presentation?
  4. Quality of data and related controls
  5. Quantity of data available?
  • What is not working as expected?
  • Is it the system – or is it internal work flow issues?
  • Does the current infrastructure support the system as needed?

Vendor Frustration February 22, 2012

Posted by Russ Arnett in Projects and Risks.
Tags: , ,
2 comments

This is just to cause some thinking about the project start process.  The best projects are those where the vendor is engaged and has knowledge of the customer (you – or your sponsor).  But this seems to become a real issue and cause of frustration with the expanded reviews and cost investigations.

It seems that customer care has become less of a priority for the larger “in control” vendors.  Since these vendors have a “captive” market – customer, the pressure to provide just simple communications just is not there.  They know that the customer cannot – or will not go to another vendor, so the level of service drops.

This is true in healthcare – several large companies have the medical equipment installed and the invested capital dollars are so intense that replacement simply will not happen.

One of my current in-process projects is in the middle of trying to squeeze out the simplest of communications from the sales engineer.  This is very frustrating, and could cause some issues with the vendor assigned resources if this attitude carries into the implementation processes.

I believe that this will now cause me to become a true relationship manager for this vendor and how to calm the business users who are at the very least anxious for a very intense and critical upgrade.

The risk here – is that lack of continued communications will impact any schedule that is developed

Tracking a project from the beginning February 19, 2012

Posted by Russ Arnett in Projects and Risks.
Tags: ,
add a comment

I will be starting a new project in March.  I will track this project by covering what I am doing and the steps involved.

I will be restricted somewhat due to the confidential requirements that are in all projects – but this will not restrict the type and manner of questions that will be required to determine project information for:

  • Identifying risks
  • Vendor knowledge – and reputation in the community
  • Vendor capabilities – technical and practical
  • Business user capabilities and dedication
  • Customer technical capabilities and commitment
  • Scope
  • Goals
  • Reality versus project requirements

I certainly welcome any ideas or feed back.

Some Rules of Project Risk Management February 16, 2012

Posted by Russ Arnett in Projects and Risks.
Tags:
add a comment

Make Risk Management Part of Your Project

This rule is essential to the success of project risk management. If you don’t truly embed risk management in your project, you can not reap the full benefits of this approach.

You as a project manager must use your experience to eliminate the  number of faulty approaches inherent in all companies. Some projects will of course, use no approach whatsoever to risk management and will fight any effort.  Usually they do not grasp the concept that the risk of failure grows when the appropriate people and time are not allowed for the appropriate review and analysis. They are somehow confident that no risks will occur in their project – because earlier project risks were covered up and not reported – and only minor issues occurred.

Professional project managers must use their influence with companies to make risk management part of their day to day operations and include it in project meetings and the training of staff.

%d bloggers like this: