ArticleJournal of medical systems2018
Optimizing Endoscope Reprocessing Resources Via Process Flow Queuing Analysis.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) is merging its older endoscope processing facilities into a single new facility that will enable high-level disinfection of endoscopes for both the ORs and Endoscopy Suite, leveraging economies of scale for improved patient care and optimal use of resources. Finalized resource planning was necessary for the merging of facilities to optimize staffing and make final equipment selections to support the nearly 33,000 annual endoscopy cases. To accomplish this, we employed operations management methodologies, analyzing the physical process flow of scopes throughout the existing Endoscopy Suite and ORs and mapping the future state capacity of the new reprocessing facility. Further, our analysis required the incorporation of historical case and reprocessing volumes in a multi-server queuing model to identify any potential wait times as a result of the new reprocessing cycle. We also performed sensitivity analysis to understand the impact of future case volume growth. We found that our future-state reprocessing facility, given planned capital expenditures for automated endoscope reprocessors (AERs) and pre-processing sinks, could easily accommodate current scope volume well within the necessary pre-cleaning-to-sink reprocessing time limit recommended by manufacturers. Further, in its current planned state, our model suggested that the future endoscope reprocessing suite at MGH could support an increase in volume of at least 90% over the next several years. Our work suggests that with simple mathematical analysis of historic case data, significant changes to a complex perioperative environment can be made with ease while keeping patient safety as the top priority.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29728778What 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.