An Equilibrium Model of Waiting Times for Elective Surgery in NSW Public Hospitals*

2011 ◽  
Vol 87 (278) ◽  
pp. 384-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
OLENA STAVRUNOVA ◽  
OLEG YEROKHIN
2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie L. Walters ◽  
Shylie F. Mackintosh ◽  
Lorraine Sheppard

Objectives. Waiting lists for elective surgery are a persistent problem faced by health systems. The progression through elective surgery waiting lists can be likened to a game of snakes and ladders where barriers (snakes) delay access to surgery and facilitators (ladders) expedite access. The aim of the present study was to describe the barriers and facilitators to delivery of total hip- and total knee-replacement surgery in South Australian public-funded hospitals. Methods. Semistructured interviews with staff, direct observation of administrative processes and documentation analysis were combined under a systems theory framework. Results. System barriers (snakes) were grouped into five categories: resources, workload, hospital engagement, community engagement and system processes. Inadequate resources was the most prominent barrier, patient cancellations resulted in one-third of administrative tasks being repeated and there was a perceived lack of engagement to maximising efficiency. Interestingly, despite a lack of resources being perceived to be the biggest problem, additional resources without system change was not considered an effective long-term strategy. Conclusions. Given the complexity of the elective surgery system, it is not surprising that single-item reforms have not created lasting reductions in waiting times. Multifaceted, whole-system reforms may be more successful. What is known about the topic? Waiting lists and waiting times for surgery are controversial, associated with frequent reforms and negative emotive headlines. We know from existing literature and anecdotal reports that individuals frequently experience lengthy delays before receiving elective surgery. Anecdotal reports also suggest that there are inefficiencies within elective surgery systems that contribute to these delays and result in cancellations, patient deterioration and poor overall satisfaction with the public health system in Australia. What isn’t clear is whether this perception is accurate and what inefficiencies do exist that could be specifically targeted for reform. What does this paper add? This paper adds weight to the argument that some inefficiencies exist within elective surgery systems, and identifies specific barriers to the delivery of total hip- and total knee-replacement surgery in South Australian public hospitals. It also identifies several strategies that could improve system function, some of which have already been implemented at a local level in response to stress on the system, and some of which require broad region- or state-wide change. In contrast to existing research, the level of detail provided in the present paper should allow for targeted reforms with the potential to improve system function and the efficiency with which joint-replacement surgery can be delivered. What are the implications for practitioners? All clinicians aim to provide the best intervention for their patients. Should the findings of this study be used to inform elective surgery system changes, patients and clinicians should experience a more streamlined approach to referral for and receipt of elective surgery in public hospitals. The consistency with which barriers and facilitators were identified across the four hospitals involved in this research supports the generalisability of the results. This further suggests that although specific to hip and knee replacement, many of the same barriers and facilitators could be in place across numerous surgical and non-surgical disciplines.


1999 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cleary ◽  
Sheree Lloyd ◽  
Ann Maguire

The efficient management of day surgery facilities benefits both patients and health administrators. Patients can benefit through minimisation of hospital stay while day surgery has the potential to increase elective surgery throughput and to reduce waiting times. This paper explores whether routinely collected morbidity data from Queensland public hospitals can be used to benchmark levels of day only surgery between hospitals. Thirteen procedures were identified that met criteria for inclusion in a day only surgery bench marking basket. Queensland public hospitals and individual procedures were benchmarked against one another and analysed to determine whether hospitals performing the 13 procedures demonstrate the same rates of day only surgery. With the development of a clinically meaningful and administratively simple tool for comparing hospital day surgery rates using routinely collected morbidity data, the opportunity now exists for health services to compare the performance of clinical services both within and between hospitals. It is also suggested that the basket of procedures identified in this study could form the basis of a national day only surgery benchmarking process.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0253875
Author(s):  
Mikko Uimonen ◽  
Ilari Kuitunen ◽  
Juha Paloneva ◽  
Antti P. Launonen ◽  
Ville Ponkilainen ◽  
...  

Background A concern has been that health care reorganizations during the first COVID-19 wave have led to delays in elective surgeries, resulting in increased complications and even mortality. This multicenter study examined the changes in waiting times of elective surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland. Methods Data on elective surgery were gathered from three Finnish public hospitals for years 2017–2020. Surgery incidence and waiting times were examined and the year 2020 was compared to the reference years 2017–2019. The mean annual, monthly, and weekly waiting times were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The most common diagnosis groups were examined separately. Findings A total of 88 693 surgeries were included during the study period. The mean waiting time in 2020 was 92.6 (CI 91.5–93.8) days, whereas the mean waiting time in the reference years was 85.8 (CI 85.1–86.5) days, resulting in an average 8% increase in waiting times in 2020. Elective procedure incidence decreased rapidly in the onset of the first COVID-19 wave in March 2020 but recovered in May and June, after which the surgery incidence was 22% higher than in the reference years and remained at this level until the end of the year. In May 2020 and thereafter until November, waiting times were longer with monthly increases varying between 7% and 34%. In gastrointestinal and genitourinary diseases and neoplasms, waiting times were longer in 2020. In cardiovascular and musculoskeletal diseases, waiting times were shorter in 2020. Conclusion The health care reorganizations due to the pandemic have increased elective surgery waiting times by as much as one-third, even though the elective surgery rate increased by one-fifth after the lockdown.


2022 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikko Uimonen ◽  
Ilari Kuitunen ◽  
Ville Ponkilainen ◽  
Ville M. Mattila

AbstractThe concern has been that this prioritization has resulted in age-related inequality between patients, with the older population suffering the most. The aim of this multicenter study was to examine the differences in incidence and waiting times of elective surgeries by age during the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in Finland. Data on elective surgery (88 716 operations) were gathered from three Finnish public hospitals for the years 2017–2020. Surgery incidence and waiting times stratified by age groups (younger than 18, 18 to 49, 50 to 69, and 70 or older) were examined, and the year 2020 was compared to the reference years 2017–2019. The mean annual, monthly, and weekly waiting times were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The first COVID-19 wave decreased surgery incidence most prominently in patients younger than 18 (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.64, CI 0.60–0.68) and 70 or older (IRR 0.68, CI 0.66–0.70). After the first wave, the incidence increased in patients aged 50 to 69 and 70 or older by 22% and 29%, respectively. Among patients younger than 18, the incidence in 2020 was 15% lower. In patients younger than 18, waiting times were at mean of 43% longer in June to December compared to the reference years. In patients aged 18 to 49, 50 to 69, and 70 or older, waiting times increased in May but recovered to normal level during fall 2020. COVID-19 decreased the incidence of surgery and led to increased waiting times. Clearing of the treatment backlog started with older patients which resulted in prolonged waiting times among pediatric patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimuthu Rathnayake ◽  
Mike Clarke

Abstract Background Long waiting times for elective surgery are common to many publicly funded health systems. Inefficiencies in referral systems in high-income countries are more pronounced than lower and middle-income countries. Primary care practitioners play a major role in determining which patients are referred to surgeon and might represent an opportunity to improve this situation. With conventional methods of referrals, surgery clinics are often overcrowded with non-surgical referrals and surgical patients experience longer waiting times as a consequence. Improving the quality of referral communications should lead to more timely access and better cost-effectiveness for elective surgical care. This review summarises the research evidence for effective interventions within the scope of primary-care referral methods in the surgical care pathway that might shorten waiting time for elective surgeries. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases in December-2019 to January-2020, for articles published after 2013. Eligibility criteria included major elective surgery lists of adult patients, excluding cancer related surgeries. Both randomised and non-randomised controlled studies were eligible. The quality of evidence was assessed using ROBINS-I, AMSTAR 2 and CASP, as appropriate to the study method used. The review presentation was limited to a narrative synthesis because of heterogeneity. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42019158455. Results The electronic search yielded 7543 records. Finally, nine articles were considered as eligible after deduplication and full article screening. The eligible research varied widely in design, scope, reported outcomes and overall quality, with one randomised trial, two quasi-experimental studies, two longitudinal follow up studies, three systematic reviews and one observational study. All the six original articles were based on referral methods in high-income countries. The included research showed that patient triage and prioritisation at the referral stage improved timely access and increased the number of consultations of surgical patients in clinics. Conclusions The available studies included a variety of interventions and were of medium to high quality researches. Managing patient referrals with proper triaging and prioritisation using structured referral formats is likely to be effective in health systems to shorten the waiting times for elective surgeries, specifically in high-income countries.


2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 611-618
Author(s):  
Markus Torkki ◽  
Miika Linna ◽  
Seppo Seitsalo ◽  
Pekka Paavolainen

Objectives: Potential problems concerning waiting list management are often monitored using mean waiting times based on empirical samples. However, the appropriateness of mean waiting time as an indicator of access can be questioned if a waiting list is not managed well, e.g., if the queue discipline is violated. This study was performed to find out about the queue discipline in waiting lists for elective surgery to reveal potential discrepancies in waiting list management. Methods: There were 1,774 waiting list patients for hallux valgus or varicose vein surgery or sterilization. The waiting time distributions of patients receiving surgery and of patients still waiting for an operation are presented in column charts. The charts are compared with two model charts. One model chart presents a high queue discipline (first in—first out) and another a poor queue discipline (random) queue. Results: There were significant differences in waiting list management across hospitals and patient categories. Examples of a poor queue discipline were found in queues for hallux valgus and varicose vein operations. Conclusions: A routine waiting list reporting should be used to guarantee the quality of waiting list management and to pinpoint potential problems in access. It is important to monitor not only the number of patients in the waiting list but also the queue discipline and the balance between demand and supply of surgical services. The purpose for this type of reporting is to ensure that the priority setting made at health policy level also works in practise.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document