Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19066677›Full record

ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2008

Measurement of surgical wait times in a universal health care system.

Jun Kawakami, Wilma M Hopman, Rachael Smith-Tryon, D Robert Siemens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Efficacy of Rezūm water vapor therapy for the treatment of catheter-dependent urinary retention A single-center, Canadian experience.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025
    Article
  2. Initiatives to reduce the waiting time to initiate oncological treatment: a scoping literature review.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. How to prioritize urological surgeries during epidemics: Lessons learned from the Toronto SARS outbreak in 2003.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2020
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. High resolution analysis of wait times and factors affecting surgical expediency.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2011
    Article
  10. Wait times: not the only indicator of performance.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2008
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Day of surgery cancellation rates in urology: Identification of modifiable factors.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jun KawakamiAssistant Professor, Department of Urology.
Wilma M Hopman
Rachael Smith-Tryon
D Robert Siemens

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionReported increases in surgical wait times for cancer have intensified the focus on this quality of health care indicator and have created a very public, concerted effort by providers to decrease wait times for cancer surgery in Ontario. Delays in access to health care are multifactorial and their measurement from existing administrative databases can lack pertinent detail. The purpose of our study was to use a real-time surgery-booking software program to examine surgical wait times at a single centre.

methodsThe real-time wait list management system Axcess.Rx has been used exclusively by the department of urology at the Kingston General Hospital to book all nonemergency surgery for 4 years. We reviewed the length of time from the decision to perform surgery to the actual date of surgery for patients in our group urological practice. Variables thought to be potentially important in predicting wait time were also collected, including the surgeon's assessment of urgency, the type of procedure (i.e., diagnostic, minor cancer, major cancer, minor benign, major benign), age and sex of the patient, inpatient versus outpatient status and year of surgery. Analysis was planned a priori to determine factors that affected wait time by using multivariate analysis to analyze variables that were significant in univariate analysis.

resultsThere were 960 operations for cancer and 1654 for benign conditions performed during the evaluation period. The overall mean wait time was 36 days for cancer and 47 days for benign conditions, respectively. The mean wait time for cancer surgery reached a nadir in 2004 at 29.9 days and subsequently increased every year, reaching 56 days in 2007. In comparison, benign surgery reached a nadir wait time of 33.7 days in 2004 and in 2007 reached 74 days at our institution. Multivariate analysis revealed that the year of surgery was still a significant predictor of wait time. Urgency score, type of procedure and inpatient versus outpatient status were also predictive of wait time.

conclusionThe application of a prospectively collected data set is an effective and important tool to measure and subsequently examine surgical wait times. This tool has been essential to the accurate assessment of the effect of resource allocation on wait times for priority and nonpriority surgical programs within a discipline. Such tools are necessary to more fully assess and follow wait times at an institution or across a region.

Identifiers

PMID19066677
PMCPMC2593602

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.