ArticleBMJ open quality2020
Losing the wait: improving patient cycle time in primary care.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Trust in Local Clinics Predict Perceptions of Vaccine Safety and Vaccination Status.Community health equity research & policy · 2026Article
- Determinants of patient cycle time in primary healthcare: a large-scale retrospective study from Saudi Arabia.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- A data-driven approach to optimizing waiting times in outpatient pharmacy services: Interrupted time series analysis.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- Re-Evaluating Access in Healthcare: Focus on Quality of Care.Public health challenges · 2025Review
- Effects of a comprehensive menstrual and sexual reproductive health intervention on RTI symptoms among adolescent girls in the Mwanza region: a mixed-methods analysis.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- Article
- Impact of proxymetacaine on the dynamics of cyclopentolate in White 6- to 7-year-olds.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025Article
- Understanding the struggle: Unique challenges of adherence in male diabetic patients in Tshwane.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2024Article
- Optimizing Outpatient Radiation Oncology Consult Workflow by Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing: Efficiency and Financial Impacts.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and Consequences of Direct Access in Physiotherapy: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Determinants for scalable adoption of autonomous AI in the detection of diabetic eye disease in diverse practice types: key best practices learned through collection of real-world data.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Review
- Managing Outpatient Cycle Times in Hospitals Using Integrated Closed-Loop Approaches.Health services insights · 2023Article
- Sustained Improvement in Patient Experience by Optimizing Patient Flow in Ambulatory Settings.Journal of patient experience · 2022Article
- Impact of actual waiting time and perceived waiting time on treatment satisfaction in patients receiving outpatient diabetes care.Diabetology international · 2021Article
- Visualizing diversity: the Oregon Health & Science University Educational Use Photo Diversity Repository.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- Can disability accommodation needs stored in electronic health records help providers prepare for patient visits? A qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inefficient clinic systems leading to prolonged wait times at primary care clinics are a source of frustration for patients, physicians, staff and administration. Measuring and shortening cycle time has the potential to improve patient experience, staff satisfaction and patient access by moving more patients through in a shorter cycle time. Limited studies have demonstrated that improvements can be made to cycle time and may result in improved patient satisfaction. Most of these studies have focused their efforts on improving efficiency at the front end of the cycle. Our aim was to improve cycle time for the whole visit to less than 60 min within 1 year by engaging our team in brainstorming solutions, presenting regular measurements to our team for review and holding regular meetings to plan rapid improvement cycles. Over the course of 1 year (2017), we were able to reduce cycle time by 12% from 71 to 65 min and to improve patient satisfaction with care. Despite the reduction in cycle time, we maintained high satisfaction scores from patients who felt that the doctor spent enough time with them. We learnt the value of engaging our team, frequent measurement for reporting, adequate staffing at the beginning of clinic, and the value of MA staff acting in a flow coordinator role. We have not only maintained this improvement but also made further small gains over the subsequent 2 years, and by April 2019, our cycle time is at 60 min, despite a marked increase in patient volume. Additional work on the time after the patient is roomed and waiting for a doctor, and further analysis of the physician workflow would be important next steps to drive further improvement.
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.