ArticleHealth care management science2013
The impact of case mix on timely access to appointments in a primary care group practice.
Article in Health care management science, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data in ambulatory care logistics: What modelers need and what practice can offer.Health care management science · 2025Article
- Strategies for interday appointment scheduling in primary care.Health care management science · 2017Article
- Dynamic allocation of same-day requests in multi-physician primary care practices in the presence of prescheduled appointments.Health care management science · 2014Article
- Panel Size, Office Visits, and Care Coordination Events: A New Workload Estimation Methodology Based on Patient Longitudinal Event Histories.MDM policy & practiceArticle
- Determining Patient Panel Size in Primary Care: A Meta-Narrative Review.Journal of primary care & community healthReview
- Physician and Practice Characteristics Associated with Family Physician Panel Size.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
At the heart of the practice of primary care is the concept of a physician panel. A panel refers to the set of patients for whose long term, holistic care the physician is responsible. A physician's appointment burden is determined by the size and composition of the panel. Size refers to the number of patients in the panel while composition refers to the case-mix, or the type of patients (older versus younger, healthy versus chronic patients), in the panel. In this paper, we quantify the impact of the size and case-mix on the ability of a multi-provider practice to provide adequate access to its empanelled patients. We use overflow frequency, or the probability that the demand exceeds the capacity, as a measure of access. We formulate problem of minimizing the maximum overflow for a multi-physician practice as a non-linear integer programming problem and establish structural insights that enable us to create simple yet near optimal heuristic strategies to change panels. This optimization framework helps a practice: (1) quantify the imbalances across physicians due to the variation in case mix and panel size, and the resulting effect on access; and (2) determine how panels can be altered in the least disruptive way to improve access. We illustrate our methodology using four test practices created using patient level data from the primary care practice at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. An important advantage of our approach is that it can be implemented in an Excel Spreadsheet and used for aggregate level planning and panel management decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23076360What 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.