Which Algorithm for Scheduling Add-on Elective Cases Maximizes Operating Room Utilization? 

1999 ◽  
Vol 91 (5) ◽  
pp. 1491-1491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franklin Dexter ◽  
Alex Macario ◽  
Rodney D. Traub

Background The algorithm to schedule add-on elective cases that maximizes operating room (OR) suite utilization is unknown. The goal of this study was to use computer simulation to evaluate 10 scheduling algorithms described in the management sciences literature to determine their relative performance at scheduling as many hours of add-on elective cases as possible into open OR time. Methods From a surgical services information system for two separate surgical suites, the authors collected these data: (1) hours of open OR time available for add-on cases in each OR each day and (2) duration of each add-on case. These empirical data were used in computer simulations of case scheduling to compare algorithms appropriate for "variable-sized bin packing with bounded space." "Variable size" refers to differing amounts of open time in each "bin," or OR. The end point of the simulations was OR utilization (time an OR was used divided by the time the OR was available). Results Each day there were 0.24 +/- 0.11 and 0.28 +/- 0.23 simulated cases (mean +/- SD) scheduled to each OR in each of the two surgical suites. The algorithm that maximized OR utilization, Best Fit Descending with fuzzy constraints, achieved OR utilizations 4% larger than the algorithm with poorest performance. Conclusions We identified the algorithm for scheduling add-on elective cases that maximizes OR utilization for surgical suites that usually have zero or one add-on elective case in each OR. The ease of implementation of the algorithm, either manually or in an OR information system, needs to be studied.

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. G. Coffman ◽  
Anja Feldmann ◽  
Nabil Kahale ◽  
Bjorn Poonen

We study call admission rates in a linear communication network with each call identified by an arrival time, duration, bandwidth requirement, and origin-destination pair. Network links all have the same bandwidth capacity, and a call can be admitted only if there is sufficient bandwidth available on every link along the call's path. Calls not admitted are held in a queue, in contrast to the protocol of loss networks. We determine maximum admission rates (capacities) under greedy call allocation rules such as First Fit and Best Fit for several baseline models and prove that the natural necessary condition for stability is sufficient. We establish the close connections between our new problems and the classic problems of bin packing and interval packing. In view of these connections, it is surprising to find that Best Fit allocation policies are inferior to First Fit policies in the models studied.


2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Dag Bratlid ◽  
Svein Petter Raknes

Background Most studies on operating room (OR) efficiency have focused on how local factors within the surgical facilities (micro level), such as turnover time, case duration and non-operative time, affects operating room efficiency. Few studies have analyzed how different strategies for organizing surgical services on the departmental or hospital level (macro level) might affect OR efficiency. Norwegian hospitals have organized their surgical services on the macro level along two different strategies. Most hospitals have separate facilities for out-patient surgery and in-patient surgery, often also geographically separated. Most hospitals also have specialty specific OR (orthopedics, gastroenterology, gynecology etc.), while in other hospitals different subspecialties share the same OR. This study was undertaken to analyze any effect of these different organizational strategies in relation to OR efficiency. Methods Data on organization of surgical services and operation volume for 2009 was gathered from eleven Norwegian university and larger county hospitals with a similar case mix. Total OR efficiency and OR efficiency during ordinary work hours were analyzed separately for out-patient and in-hospital surgery, including emergency operations. Calculation of OR during ordinary hours (8am-3pm) was based on 230 workdays per year, and included emergency operations. Results OR efficiency was 721 operations per OR per year with a range from 525 to 1049 and was not related to the different strategies for organizing these services. Furthermore, no correlation was found between OR efficiency and operation volume or number of OR. OR efficiency during ordinary hours and workdays was 3.6 operations per day for out-patient surgery and 1.8 for in-patient surgery including emergency operations. This was considerably less than standards used in planning surgical facilities in Norwegian hospitals. Conclusion OR efficiency is probably more related to organization of the surgical services on the micro level than to strategies for organizing these services on the macro level. The large variation in operating room efficiency in Norwegian hospitals indicates that many hospitals have a potential for improvement. The discrepancy between actual OR efficiency and standards used for planning of surgical facilities represents a challenge in future hospital planning.


2003 ◽  
pp. 1119-1126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franklin Dexter ◽  
Amr E. Abouleish ◽  
Richard H. Epstein ◽  
Charles W. Whitten ◽  
David A. Lubarsky

2002 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 308-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
János Csirik ◽  
Gerhard J. Woeginger

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document