ArticleHealth policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2009
Insight into capacity planning for cardiac catheterization services: policy lessons learned from "Looking in the Mirror" over a decade.
Article in Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Is it time to rebalance the case mix? A portfolio analysis of direct catheterization laboratory costs over a 5-year period.European journal of medical research · 2016Article
- Racial disparities in the use of cardiac revascularization: does local hospital capacity matter?PloS one · 2013Article
- Article
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
backgroundCardiac catheterization (CATH) is key in the diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease. Increasing demand coupled with limited resources in a publicly funded system (e.g. Ontario, the largest province in Canada) resulted in a waitlist for this procedure. Our province has recommended maximum wait times (RMWT) for patients referred to CATH. The purpose of this study is to describe our experience over the past decade in attempting to meet RMWTs for patients needing CATH at our centre, and to discuss issues concerning capacity planning in providing timely service.
methodsWe measured the proportion of patients undergoing a procedure within the RWMT, and calculated both the mean number of patients and mean length of time on the wait list for each year over a decade for those referred to CATH using prospectively collected registry data. We identified factors that increased referrals or improved capacity. Wait time was compared to community standard RMWTs in order to establish if and how RMWTs were achieved.
resultsDespite a number of systematic and capacity improvements, RMWTs were not achieved until after the addition of a 4th laboratory.
interpretationImproving access to CATH in our centre was reactive to the increasing need of the community rather than based on anticipation of need and continuity of service within RMWTs. Registry data can help monitor key indicators (e.g. RMWT). Prudent use of this information should help policy makers with future expansion in our region.
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.