Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27081406›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2016

The Development of Patient Scheduling Groups for an Effective Appointment System.

Yu Li Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Yu Li HuangMayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient access to care and long wait times has been identified as major problems in outpatient delivery systems. These aspects impact medical staff productivity, service quality, clinic efficiency, and health-care cost.

objectivesThis study proposed to redesign existing patient types into scheduling groups so that the total cost of clinic flow and scheduling flexibility was minimized. The optimal scheduling group aimed to improve clinic efficiency and accessibility.

methodsThe proposed approach used the simulation optimization technique and was demonstrated in a Primary Care physician clinic. Patient type included, emergency/urgent care (ER/UC), follow-up (FU), new patient (NP), office visit (OV), physical exam (PE), and well child care (WCC). One scheduling group was designed for this physician. The approach steps were to collect physician treatment time data for each patient type, form the possible scheduling groups, simulate daily clinic flow and patient appointment requests, calculate costs of clinic flow as well as appointment flexibility, and find the scheduling group that minimized the total cost.

resultsThe cost of clinic flow was minimized at the scheduling group of four, an 8.3% reduction from the group of one. The four groups were: 1. WCC, 2. OV, 3. FU and ER/UC, and 4. PE and NP. The cost of flexibility was always minimized at the group of one. The total cost was minimized at the group of two. WCC was considered separate and the others were grouped together. The total cost reduction was 1.3% from the group of one.

conclusionsThis study provided an alternative method of redesigning patient scheduling groups to address the impact on both clinic flow and appointment accessibility. Balance between them ensured the feasibility to the recognized issues of patient service and access to care. The robustness of the proposed method on the changes of clinic conditions was also discussed.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesEfficiency, OrganizationalHealth Care CostsHealth Services AccessibilityHumansAppointment schedulingscheduling efficiencyscheduling flexibilityscheduling group

Identifiers

PMID27081406
PMCPMC4817334

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.