ArticleBMC health services research2007
The acceptability of waiting times for elective general surgery and the appropriateness of prioritising patients.
Article in BMC health services research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- A model of access combining triage with initial management reduced waiting time for community outpatient services: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.BMC medicine · 2018Trial
- Mapping strategies for reducing inequalities in adult elective surgical care in the United Kingdom: a living scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Time to elective surgery and its predictors after first cancellation at Debremarkos Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- A Delphi study to explore clinician and lived experience perspectives on setting priorities in eating disorder services.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Developing a prioritisation framework for patients in need of coronary artery angiography.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Long Waiting Times for Elective Hospital Care - Breaking the Vicious Circle by Abandoning Prioritisation.International journal of health policy and management · 2020Article
- Complications While Waiting for IBD Surgery-Short Report.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2020Article
- Specific timely appointments for triage to reduce wait times in a medical outpatient clinic: protocol of a pre-post study with process evaluation.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Surgical waiting times and patient choice: how much delay do patients really want?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2015Article
- A model to prioritize access to elective surgery on the basis of clinical urgency and waiting time.BMC health services research · 2009Article
- Waiting for surgery from the patient perspective.Psychology research and behavior management · 2009Article
- First Step to Equity and Organization in Waiting Lines for Stone Surgery. Translation of Prioritization Scores.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProblematic waiting lists in public health care threaten the equity and timeliness of care provision in several countries. This study assesses different stakeholders' views on the acceptability of waiting lists in health care, their preferences for priority care of patients, and their judgements on acceptable waiting times for surgical patients.
methodsA questionnaire survey was conducted among 257 former patients (82 with varicose veins, 86 with inguinal hernia, and 89 with gallstones), 101 surgeons, 95 occupational physicians, and 65 GPs. Judgements on acceptable waiting times were assessed using vignettes of patients with varicose veins, inguinal hernia, and gallstones.
resultsParticipants endorsed the prioritisation of patients based on clinical need, but not on ability to benefit. The groups had significantly different opinions (p < 0.05) on the use of non-clinical priority criteria and on the need for uniformity in the prioritisation process. Acceptable waiting times ranged between 2 and 25 weeks depending on the type of disorder (p < 0.001) and the severity of physical and psychosocial problems of patients (p < 0.001). Judgements were similar between the survey groups (p = 0.3) but responses varied considerably within each group depending on the individual's attitude towards waiting lists in health care (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe explicit prioritisation of patients seems an accepted means for reducing the overall burden from waiting lists. The disagreement about appropriate prioritisation criteria and the need for uniformity, however, raises concern about equity when implementing prioritisation in daily practice. Single factor waiting time thresholds seem insufficient for securing timely care provision in the presence of long waiting lists as they do not account for the different consequences of waiting between patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.