ArticleJournal of healthcare leadership2018
Model for allocation of medical specialists in a hospital network.
Article in Journal of healthcare leadership, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAs human diseases are becoming increasingly complex, the need for medical specialist consultation is more pronounced, and innovative ways to allocate medical specialists in hospital networks are essential. This study aimed to construct allocation models using a multi-objective programming approach in a large private hospital network in Thailand.
methodsOur study included 13 medical specialist types in four main disease groups of the Bangkok Dusit Medical Services network. Mixed-integer linear programming models were developed using inputs from a modified Delphi survey of executives, the Physician Engagement Survey, and the Physician Registry (PR) databases and featuring three objectives: 1) minimizing travel expense, 2) optimizing physician engagement, and 3) maximizing the chance of direct patient encounters with respective medical specialists who were formally qualified for the clinical complexity of the patients, as measured by the case mix index (CMI).
resultsThe constructed models included the core components but varied by a combination of whether part-time medical specialists are included or not (noPT) and whether CMI is included (CMI) or not (noCMI). Because the noPT + CMI model had the highest capability to solve for specialist allocation, it was further improved for some specialist types in terms of flexibility for sensitivity analysis of the variables. Moreover, to assess the feasibility and practicality of the models, a web-based system incorporating the final model was developed to support the central executives' decision to allocate medical specialists to the network, especially for finding the most optimal and timely solution for widespread shortages.
conclusionThe linear programming models that accommodate critical components for allocating medical specialists in the hospital network were feasible and practical for the central executives' timely decision making. The models could be further tested for their application in hospitals in the public sector or other private hospital networks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.