Emergency (2013); 1 (1): ***-*** This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Copyright © 2013 Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved. Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com \ 1 Emergency (2013); 1 (1): 1-6 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Utilization of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Method in Increasing the Revenue of Emergency Department; a Prospective Cohort Study Ali Shahrami1, Farhad Rahmati2*, Hamid Kariman1, Behrooz Hashemi2, Majid Rahmati3, Alireza Baratloo2, Mohammad Mehdi Forouzanfar2, Saeed Safari2 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Imam Hossein Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Shohadaye Tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 3. Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Science, University of Mazandaran, Sari, Iran Abstract Introduction: The balance between revenue and cost of an organization/system is essential to maintain its sur- vival and quality of services. Emergency departments (ED) are one of the most important parts of health care de- livery system. Financial discipline of EDs, by increasing the efficiency and profitability, can directly affect the qual- ity of care and subsequently patient satisfaction. Accordingly, the present study attempts to investigate failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method in identifying the problems leading to the loss of ED revenue and offer solutions to help fix these problems. Methods: This prospective cohort study investigated the financial records of ED patients and evaluated the effective errors in reducing the revenue in ED of Imam Hossein hospital, Tehran, Iran, from October 2007 to November 2009. The whole department was divided into one main system and six subsystems, based on FMEA. The study was divided into two phases. In the first phase, the problems leading to the loss of revenue in each subsystem were identified and weighted into four groups using risk priority number (RPN), and the solutions for fixing them were planned. Then, in the second phase, discovered defects in the first phase were fixed according to their priority. Finally, the impact of each solution was compared before and after intervention using the repeated measure ANOVA test. Results: 100 financial records of ED patients were evaluat- ed during the first phase of the study. The average of ED revenue in the six months of the first phase was 73.1±3.65 thousand US dollars/month. 12 types of errors were detected in the predefined subsystems. ED reve- nue rose from 73.1 to 153.1, 207.06, 240, and 320 thousand US dollars/month after solving first, second, third, and fourth priority problems, respectively (337.75% increase in two years) (p<0.001). 111.0% increase in the ED revenue after solving of first priority problems revealed that they were extremely indispensable in decreasing the revenue (p<0.0001). Conclusion: The findings of the present study revealed that FMEA could be considered as an efficient model for increasing the revenue of emergency department. According to this model, not recording the services by the nursing unit, and lack of specific identifying code for the patients moving from ED to any other department, were the two first priority problems in decreasing our ED revenue. Key words: Organizational productivity; failure mode and effects analysis method; emergency services; financial management; cost saving Cite this article as: Shahrami A, Rahmati F, Kariman H, et al. Utilization of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method in increasing the revenue of emergency department: a prospective cohort study. Emergency. 2013;1(1):1-6. Introduction:1 alance between revenue and cost of an organiza- tion/system is essential to maintain its survival and quality of services (1). Emergency depart- ments (ED) with a large number of annual visits are one of the most important parts of health care delivery sys- tem (2-4). Financial discipline of ED can directly affect the quality of care and subsequently patient satisfaction by increasing efficiency and profitability of the depart- ment (5, 6). In this context, finding an efficient method *Corresponding Author: Farhad Rahmati; Department of Emergency Medicine, Shohadaye Tajrish Hospital, Tajrish Square, Tehran, Iran. Tel/Fax: +982122721155 Email: f.rahmati2000@yahoo.com Received: 1 September 2013; Accepted: 25 November 2013 for identifying defects and failures, which decrease the revenue and increase the cost, has a high priority. Fail- ure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is one of the methods for identification and analysis of failures and errors (7-12). Early and continuous application of this method in the process of designing, allows managers to depict failures and reach a reliable, secure and custom- er-friendly management model (12). The application of FMEA in healthcare systems was first investigated in the 1990s. It was mainly used to avoid errors in medical therapies and became so popular in the second half of this decade (12, 13). Accordingly, the present study at- tempts to investigate FMEA in identifying the problems leading to ED revenue loss and offer solutions to help fix these problems. B http://www.jemerg.com/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68005376 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68005376 This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Copyright © 2013 Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved. Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com \ 2 Shahrami et al Methods: Study design and setting This prospective cohort study investigated the financial records of ED patients and evaluated the effective er- rors in reducing revenue in ED of Imam Hossein Hospi- tal (With an average of 4500 visits/month), Tehran, Iran, throughout an about 24-month period, from Octo- ber 2007 to November 2009. A workgroup (consisting of the head of ED, head of the insurance office, head of the nursing office, and the study researchers), was es- tablished to find financial problems and offer solutions. Based on FMEA, the whole department was divided into one main system and 6 subsystems: reception unit, nursing unit, medical unit, secretarial unit, discharge unit, and insurance unit. In order to have a clear view on the defects of each subsystem, data was collected through three main methods. I) regular and focused meetings with the personnel working in the subsystem and compiling defect reports; II) regular meetings with the staff of the next subsystem to identify the problems in the preceding subset based on the analyzed files; and III) random selection and analysis of files by the au- thors, in the presence of the related personnel. Accord- ing to the designed protocol, the researchers along with each subsystem’s personnel investigated the files and then, gave them to the personnel in the next subsystem. They were asked to find the problems and give sugges- tions to remove them. The solutions for removing the defects were also clarified with the help of the expert panel in medical economy. In these solutions, the re- sponsibility of each subsystem and the period required to obtain the results were assigned. In addition, a su- pervising unit was planned to evaluate all parts of the process. Study Details The study was performed in two phases: First phase: In this phase, the defects in the subsys- tems were detected and prioritized according to FMEA. This phase was carried out during the first six months of the study (October 2007 to April 2008). Each defect was weighed based on its impact on the final product of the system. This weight was called risk priority number (RPN) and calculated through the following formula: RPN= severity × diagnosis probability × detection de- gree Severity coefficient was defined as the impact of the pa- rameter on revenue. According to the probable impact of each defect on the revenue, a coefficient between 1 and 3 was assigned. These assignments were based on: (1) no financial loss even if the defect is continuous, (2) possibility of financial loss because of the present defect and (3) definite financial loss with the continual pres- ence of the defect. Diagnosis probability coefficient was defined so that the score was 1, if the defect was diagnosed through one method of data collection (mentioned above), 2 if it was diagnosed through two of them, and if all three methods diagnosed the defect, the score was 3. Detection degree coefficient was defined using the fre- quency of the defects, so that if incidence of defect was 1 to 10 times per month, the assigned score was 1; 2 was assigned to 11 to 20 times, and if the number ex- ceeded 20 time per month the score would be 3. Then, defects with RPN> 15 were put into the first pri- ority category; RPN between 6 and 15 into the second priority; RPN 4 to 6 in the third priority; and RPN< 4 into the fourth priority problems. Second phase: In this phase, discovered defects in the first phase were fixed according to their priority during April 2008 to September 2009. Finally, the impact of each solution was evaluated before and after the inter- ventions. Statistical analysis The collected data were put into SPSS 21.0 statistical software and after ensuring that all parameters were normal, the impact of each solution was rated using repeated measures ANOVA test before and after inter- ventions. p<0.05 was considered as the level of signifi- cance. Results: 100 financial records of ED patients were evaluated during the first phase of the study. A close evaluation of the revenue of the ED revealed that the average reve- nue was 73.1±3.65 thousand US dollars per month in the six months of the first phase. Findings of first phase 12 types of errors were detected in the six predefined subsystems as: 1) Accepting patients with expired insurance credit by the reception unit. 2) Not recording the services by the nursing unit. 3) Lack of coordination between nursing reports and the doctor's prescriptions. 4) Not recording medical procedures by physicians. 5) Incomplete recording of procedures by physicians. 6) Ambiguous outpatient physicians' prescriptions on insurance files. 7) Physicians' prescriptions with no or illegible dates on insurance files. 8) Partial documentation of services by secretarial unit; 9) Lack of final control on patients’ files by secretarial unit. 10) Late sending of the patients’ files to the discharge unit. 11) Lack of specific identifying code for the patients’ files moving from the ED to any other department. 12) Late sending of the patients’ files to the agents of the insurance companies. http://www.jemerg.com/ This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Copyright © 2013 Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved. Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com \ 3 Emergency (2013); 1 (1): 1-6 Table 1: Frequency and priority of errors present in each subsystem  Subsystem Error RPN1 Frequency Reception Accepting patients with expired insurance credit 6 7 (7%) Nursing Not recording the services 27 23 (23%) Lack of coordination between the nursing reports and the doctor's prescriptions 4 10 (10%) Medical Not recording the medical procedures 12 12 (12%) Incomplete recording of procedures 4 8 (8%) Ambiguous outpatient prescriptions on insurance files 4 9 (9%) Prescriptions without or with illegible dates on insurance files 6 8 (8%) Secretarial Partial documentation of services 6 6 (6%) Lack of final control on patients’ files 4 4 (4%) Late sending of the files to the discharge unit 2 4 (4%) Discharge Lack of specific identifying code for the patients files moving from the ED to any other department 27 100 (100%) Insurance Late sending of the patients' file to the agents of the insurance companies 2 6 (6%) 1. Risk priority number Table 2: Suggested solutions offered to fix errors based on their priority  Priority Error Suggested solutions First 1- Not recording the services by nursing unit 2- Lack of specific identifying code for the patients moving from the ED to any other department 1- Close control over the input and output services through the ED's store house 2-Holding the head of the shift responsible 3-Simplification of computer registration in the agenda 4-Assigning a separate section (code) for emergency services in the accounting software Second 1- Not recording the medical procedures 2- Prescriptions with no or illegible dates on the insurance file 3- Incomplete recording of procedures 4- Accepting patients with expired insurance credit 1- Explaining the direct effects of ED revenue on the per- sonnel's income 2- Rebuking the faulty personnel and reducing their pen- sions in case there is a problem with the expiration of the insurance or the files sent 3- Similar rebuking or encouragement policies for the department's secretaries 4- Returning the illegible or invalid prescriptions on insurance files to the faculty members for fixing 5- Nursing system is directly responsible for recording the procedures followed by doctors while recording the services 6- Residents' pensions are directly affected by their per- formance Third 1- Late sending of the files to the discharge unit 2- Late sending of the files to the agents of the insurance companies 1- Giving the responsibility of sending files of each shift to the secretary of the same shift 2- Coordination between the accounting office and the insurance systems Fourth 1- Lack of coordination between the nursing re- ports and the doctors' prescriptions 2- Partial documentation of services by secretarial unit 3- Ambiguous outpatient prescriptions on insur- ance files 4- Lack of final control on patients’ files 1- Random revision of nursing reports with the attend- ance of the head of the shift and resident 2- Returning prescriptions on insurance files with am- biguous seals to the faculty members for fixing the prob- lems before sending to the insurance unit 3- Controlling the used services of residents by faculty members 4- Controlling the recording of services used by resi- dents while recording the nursing report 5- Promotional and instructional classes for the secretar- ies for a final control before sending the files to the in- surance unit http://www.jemerg.com/ This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Copyright © 2013 Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved. Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com \ 4 Shahrami et al Table 1 demonstrates the frequency and priority of er- rors in each subsystem. The third subsystem (medical unit) with its four errors has the highest rate of errors. Findings of second phase The solutions offered to fix the above-mentioned errors are demonstrated in table 2. The period needed to solve the problems was three months for each priority (sum: 12 months). First priority problems Not recording the services by nursing unit and lack of specific identifying code for the patients moving from ED to any other department, were the two first priority problems. Implementing the solutions offered in table 2 raised the ED revenue to 153.1 thousand US dollars per month at the end of July 2008. Repeated measure ANO- VA showed a significant increase of revenue (111.0%) during April to July 2008 (df= 1, 7; F= 456.5, p<0.0001). Second priority problems Not recording the medical procedures by physicians, physicians' prescriptions with no or illegible dates on insurance files, incomplete recording of procedures by physicians, and accepting patients with expired insur- ance credit by the reception unit were the four second priority problems. Interventions made according to table 2 induced a great increase in the revenue. At the end of October 2008, the ED revenue rose to be 207.06 thousand US dollars per month. This 35.4% raise was significant as well (df= 1, 7; F= 199.6, p <0.0001). Third priority problems Late sending of the patients' files to the discharge unit and late sending of the patients' file to the agents of the insurance companies were the two third priority prob- lems. By solving these problems, the ED revenue expe- rienced a 15.9% increase and reached 240 thousand US dollars per month. This showed a significant difference compared to October 2008 (df= 1, 7; F= 83.2, p<0.0001). Fourth priority problems Lack of coordination between the nursing reports and doctors' prescriptions, partial documentation of ser- vices by secretarial unit, ambiguous outpatient physi- cians' prescriptions on insurance files, and lack of final control on patients’ files by secretarial unit were fourth priority problems. By enacting the solutions, the reve- nue experienced a 33.3% increase and reached 320 thousands US dollar per month at the end of September 2009 (df= 1, 7; F= 112.5, p<0.0001). In summary, ED revenue rose from 73.1 thousand US dollars per month to 153.1 after first priority problems solving, 207.06 after second priority, 240 after third priority, and 320 at the end of the study [(320- 73.1/73.1) ×100=337.75%](P<0.001). Maximum in- crease in revenue occurred after solving first (111.0%), second (35.4%), fourth (33.3%), and third (15.9%) pri- ority problems, respectively. Figure 1 reveals the trend of revenue changes during the second phase of study Figure 1: Trend of revenue changes during the study period. A-B: first phase, B-G: second phase (B-C: solving of first priority problems, C-D: solving of second priority problems, D-E: solving of third priority problems, E-F: study temporarily stopped, F- G: solving of fourth priority problems) G-H: two months observation.  http://www.jemerg.com/ This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Copyright © 2013 Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved. Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com \ 5 Emergency (2013); 1 (1): 1-6 period. As figure 1 shows, between the points E and F, the ED revenue reduces and in the mid May 2009, it reaches 211.76 thousand US dollars per month (1, 7;F= 72.6, p<0.0001). This could be explained by a temporar- ily delay in the study due to closing the trauma depart- ment and reduction in the number of the admitted pa- tients. Also, in late November 2009, the revenue did not differ greatly compared to late September 2009 (df= 1, 7; F= 0.11, p=0.74). In these two months of observation, the revenue of the ED was 317.64 thousand US dol- lars/month (p>0.05). Discussion: Findings of the present study revealed that proper management in the financial system and its subsystems is potentially able to change a fruitless entity into a profitable one. Identifying and solving errors in the fi- nancial system of the ED in this study increased the revenue by 337.75% in two years. Implementing the solutions rose ED revenue from 73.1 thousand US dol- lars per month to 153.1 after first priority problems solving, 207.06 after second priority, 240 after third priority, and 320 at the end of the study. 111.0% in- crease in the ED revenue after solving of first priority problems revealed that the above-mentioned problems were extremely indispensable in decreasing the reve- nue. Decreasing the admitted patients and closing the trauma department led to pausing the study after solv- ing third priority problems. This could be the reason for the surprising rise in revenue after solving fourth prior- ity problems. Application of FMEA in this study re- vealed the fact that this system is not only applicable in industrial contexts, but also useful in medical finance and increases the profitability of these systems. The study also demonstrated that FMEA model is an effi- cient method in recognizing the errors in medical sys- tems. For instance, Sheble et al. using this model, found approximately 100 errors in prescription of antibiotics, and monitored them. They stated that although this method has a high efficiency, healthcare systems should not rely merely on it in order to guarantee their pa- tients' immunity (14). Robinson et al. demonstrated that application of this model decreased prescription of wrong drugs by 9% in chemotherapy patients and in- creased enforcement of standard procedures by 54%. They believed that computerized registration of the medicine is one of the most important measures that could be taken to elevate the efficiency in the system (15). Kim et al. showed that FMEA model decreased therapeutic errors in children under chemotherapy. They had similar findings and suggested that computer- ized registration had a positive effect on decreasing errors (16). Wetterneck et al. investigated the efficiency of this model in prescription of intravenous medica- tions and concluded that FMEA is extremely efficient in identifying potential problems (17). Several other avail- able studies demonstrate the efficiency of FMEA in de- creasing the error rate in medicine and healthcare sys- tems (8, 18, 19). The authors of the present study failed to find any studies on the efficiency of this model in in- creasing the revenue or decreasing the loss in healthcare organizations. However, a comparison be- tween the findings of this study and other studies con- cerning the efficiency of FMEA model and revealed the huge compatibility between them. Similar studies have also demonstrated that application of FMEA optimizes the services offered to patients and increase the effi- ciency. Limitation It could be thought that the difference in the number of the patients increased the revenue in the ED. However, it should be noted that the number of patients did not differ significantly in the study period. On the other hand, there is a 10% increase in tariffs of the healthcare services according to the law enforced by the Iranian Ministry of Health. Because the increase found in this study is far more than the 10% imposed by the gov- ernment, the authors believe that the reason of increase is the measure taken by authors. Lack of control group was another limitation of the present study. It is rec- ommended that, in future studies, FMEA be used to fix problems in other departments to ensure its reliability and validity. Conclusion: The findings of the present study revealed that FMEA could be considered as an efficient model for increasing the revenue in the ED. According to this model, not re- cording the services by nursing unit and lack of specific identifying code for the patients' files, moving from ED to any other department, were the two first priority problems in decreasing our ED revenue. Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank all the emergency unit personnel and the staff of the medical statistics center of Imam Hossein Hospital. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of inter- est. Funding: None Authors’ contribution: All authors contribute in drafting/revising the manu- script, study concept or design, analysis or interpreta- tion of data. References: 1. Pines JM, Batt RJ, Hilton JA, Terwiesch C. The financial consequences of lost demand and reducing boarding in hospital emergency departments. Ann Emerg Med. 2011; 58(4):331-40. 2. Geelhoed GC, de Klerk NH. Emergency department overcrowding, mortality and the 4-hour rule in Western Australia. Med J Aust. 2012;196(2):122-6. http://www.jemerg.com/ This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Copyright © 2013 Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved. Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com \ 6 Shahrami et al 3. Richardson DB. Increase in patient mortality at 10 days associated with emergency department overcrowding. Med J Aust. 2006;184(5):213. 4. Trzeciak S, Rivers E. Emergency department overcrowding in the United States: an emerging threat to patient safety and public health. Emerg Med J. 2003;20(5):402-5. 5. Eng TR, Maxfield A, Patrick K, Deering MJ, Ratzan SC, Gustafson DH. Access to health information and support. JAMA. 1998;280(15):1371-5. 6. Russell S, Gilson L. User fee policies to promote health service access for the poor: a wolf in sheep's clothing? Int J Health Serv. 1997;27(2):359-79. 7. Bonfant G, Belfanti P, Paternoster G, et al. Clinical risk analysis with failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) model in a dialysis unit. J Nephrol. 2010;23(1):111-7. 8. Cinque M, Coronato A, Testa A. A failure modes and effects analysis of mobile health monitoring systems. Innovations and Advances in Computer, Information, Sstems Sciences, and Engineering: Springer; 2013. p. 569-82. 9. Freitag M, Carroll VS. Handoff communication: using failure modes and effects analysis to improve the transition in care process. Qual Manage Healthcare. 2011;20(2):103-9. 10. Khare RK, Nannicelli AP, Powell ES, Seivert NP, Adams JG, Holl JL. Use of Risk Assessment Analysis by Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality to Reduce Door-to-Balloon Time. An Emerg Med. 2013;62(4):388-98. 11. Wilkinson DA, Kolar MD. Failure modes and effects analysis applied to high-dose-rate brachytherapy treatment planning. Brachytherapy. 2013; 12(4): 382–6. 12. Williams E, Talley R. The use of failure mode effect and criticality analysis in a medication error subcommittee. Hosp Pharm. 1994;29(4):331-7. 13. DeRosier J, Stalhandske E, Bagian JP, Nudell T. Using health care Failure Mode and Effect Analysis: the VA National Center for Patient Safety's prospective risk analysis system. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2002;28(5):248-67. 14. Shebl N, Franklin B, Barber N, Burnett S, Parand A. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis: views of hospital staff in the UK. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012;17(1):37-43. 15. Robinson DL, Heigham M, Clark J. Using failure mode and effects analysis for safe administration of chemotherapy to hospitalized children with cancer. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2006;32(3):161-6. 16. Kim GR, Chen AR, Arceci RJ, et al. Error reduction in pediatric chemotherapy: computerized order entry and failure modes and effects analysis. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160(5):495. 17. Wetterneck TB, Skibinski KA, Roberts TL, et al. Using failure mode and effects analysis to plan implementation of smart iv pump technology. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2006;63 (16):1528-38. 18. Franklin BD, Shebl NA, Barber N. Failure mode and effects analysis: too little for too much? BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21(7): 607-11. 19. Hernandez B, Bravo C, Esteban M, et al. GRP-073 Failure Mode and Effect Analysis in Improving the Safety of the Chemotherapy Process. Eur J Hosp Pharm Sci Pract 2013;20 (Suppl 1):A26-A7. http://www.jemerg.com/