Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30382845›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Improving accessibility for outpatients in specialist clinics: reducing long waiting times and waiting lists with a simple analytic approach.

Karl Arne Johannessen, Nina Alexandersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The Role of Value Stream Mapping in Healthcare Services: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

2 authors.

Karl Arne JohannessenThe Intervention Center, Oslo university hospital, Oslo, Norway. xakljo@ous-hf.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2679-0007
Nina AlexandersenDepartment of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLack of resources is often cited as a reason for long waiting times and queues in health services. However, recent research indicates these problems are related to factors such as uncoordinated variation of demand and capacity, planning horizons, and lower capacity than the potential of actual resources. This study aimed to demonstrate that long waiting times and wait lists are not necessarily associated with increasing demand or changes in resources. We report how substantial reductions in waiting times/wait lists across a range of specialties was obtained by improvements of basic problems identified through value-stream mapping and unsophisticated analyses.

methodsIn-depth analyses of current operational processes by value-stream mapping were used to identify bottlenecks and sources of waste. Waiting parameters and measures of demand and resources were assessed monthly from 12 months before the intervention to 6 months after the intervention. The effect of the intervention on reducing waiting time and number of patients waiting were evaluated by a difference-in-differences analysis.

resultsMean waiting time across all clinics was reduced from 162 + 69 days (range 74-312 days) at baseline to 52 + 10 days (range 41-74 days) 6 months after the intervention. The time needed to achieve a waiting time of 65 days varied from 4 to 21 months. The number of new patients waiting was reduced from 15,874 (range 369-2980) to 8922 (range 296-1650), and the number of delayed returning patients was reduced from 18,700 (310-3324) to 5993 (40-1337) (p < 0.01 for all). Improvement in waiting measures paralleled a significant increase in planning horizon.

conclusionsSignificant improvements in accessibility for patients waiting for service may be achieved by applying unsophisticated methods and analyses and without increasing resources. Engagement of clinical management and involvement of front line personnel are important factors for improvement.

Indexed as

Waiting ListsAmbulatory CareHealth Services AccessibilityHumansNorwayOutpatient Clinics, HospitalOutpatientsQuality ImprovementLEANNorwayOutpatient bookingPhysician productivityPlanning horizonQuality improvementWaiting time

Identifiers

PMID30382845
PMCPMC6211460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.