ReviewDer Anaesthesist2010
[Quality of OR planning. Avoiding operating room underutilization or overutilization].
Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Timeliness of Operating Room Case Planning and Time Utilization: Influence of First and To-Follow Cases.Frontiers in medicine · 2017Article
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
backgroundAccurate scheduling of operations is essential for an efficiently used OR. The aim of this investigation was to describe the quality of OR scheduling in the analyzed OR. Furthermore suggestions for avoiding underutilization or overutilization through optimized OR planning should be addressed if possible.
methodsThe planned duration, the real duration and the differences in minutes of 10,831 operations were analyzed. The statistical distribution was determined and the median, the quartiles, the interquartile range and the number of operations with a real duration lasting longer than planned were calculated. All operations were grouped in ascending order from the shortest planned duration. All planning groups were analyzed statistically and the results were compared.
resultsThe planned OR durations did not show a normal distribution and 34% of all operations showed a real duration lasting longer than planned. The median of the differences was 10 min indicating that 50% of all operations were finished within 10 min earlier than planned. Operations with planned longer durations (>150 min) showed significantly more frequently a real duration lasting longer than planned. Furthermore, the differences between planned and real durations were additionally larger when planned durations were longer than 150 min.
conclusionPrognosis of operations with longer planned duration (>150 min) should be improved in the OR area analyzed. Scheduling of these operations at the beginning of the OR list or with a sufficient time interval towards the end of the appointed OR block time within the OR list can avoid or at least minimize underutilization and overutilization of the OR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20461347What 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.