ArticleJournal of medical systems2016
The Impact of Overestimations of Surgical Control Times Across Multiple Specialties on Medical Systems.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Should we abandon the patient-specific instrumentation ship in total knee arthroplasty? Not quite yet!BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Pooled it
- Development and Evaluation of an Operative Case Length Prediction Model in Adult Surgical Patients.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Variability and relative contribution of surgeon- and anesthesia-specific time components to total procedural time in cardiac surgery.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Operating Room Usage Time Estimation with Machine Learning Models.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Benchmarking of Anesthesia and Surgical Control Times by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT®) Codes.Journal of medical systems · 2022Article
- Improving Operating Room Efficiency: Machine Learning Approach to Predict Case-Time Duration.Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 2019Article
- Perioperative Information Systems: Opportunities to Improve Delivery of Care and Clinical Outcomes in Cardiac and Vascular Surgery.Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia · 2018Review
- Introduction of a new electronic medical record system has mixed effects on first surgical case efficiency metrics.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2017Article
- Analysis to Establish Differences in Efficiency Metrics Between Operating Room and Non-Operating Room Anesthesia Cases.Journal of medical systems · 2017Article
- Effect of the Implementation of a New Electronic Health Record System on Surgical Case Turnover Time.Journal of medical systems · 2017Article
- Assessment of operative times of multiple surgical specialties in a public university hospital.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)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
Optimization of operating room (OR) resources and costs require accurate estimations of procedure times. In some institutions, surgeons are asked to predict their surgical control time (SCT), which typically constitutes the majority of the total procedure time. Here, we examine differences in predicted versus actual SCT and variations by specialty. Data included all scheduled surgical procedures at one academic institution from October 2008 - September 2014. Exclusion criteria consisted of missing values for SCT as well as estimated SCTs that fell outside of 5 standard deviations of any given procedure's mean. Differences in estimation were calculated by subtracting estimated SCT from actual SCT and compared against a null hypothesis of 0 with a two-tailed t-test. Differences between specialties were examined using analysis of variance and Games-Howell tests. Between 2008 and 2014, 119,410 scheduled procedures were performed. After exclusion, 116,599 cases were analyzed. On average, SCT was overestimated by 12.9 min (p < 0.0001). Overestimations persisted when divided by specialty (p < 0.0001). With thoracic surgery as a control, all other specialties except for cardiac surgery had overestimations of SCT. The greatest time differences were seen in dental (37.6 min, p < 0.0001), cardiology (33.0 min, p < 0.0001), and neurosurgery (29.7 min, p < 0.0001). Overall, SCTs are overestimated at this institution across many specialties. Depending on the methodology by which a hospital chooses to allocate OR time, SCT estimations could potentially be reduced in certain specialties to allow for better allocation of OR resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26860918What 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.