ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2022
Socioeconomic inequality, waiting time initiatives and austerity in Scotland: an interrupted time series analysis of elective hip and knee replacements and arthroscopies.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping strategies for reducing inequalities in adult elective surgical care in the United Kingdom: a living scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Navigating the social and healthcare sector: experiences and perspectives of ethnic minority family members/designated care givers of individuals with developmental disorders within the social and healthcare systems.International journal of developmental disabilities · 2026Article
- Africa, climate change and the markets.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2022Article
- Equity of access to NHS-funded hip replacements in England and Wales: Trends from 2006 to 2016.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2022Article
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
objectivesNational Health Service (NHS) waiting times have long been a political priority in Scotland. In 2002, the Scottish government launched a programme of investment and reform to reduce waiting times. The effect on waiting time inequality is unknown as is the impact of subsequent austerity measures.
designAn interrupted time series analysis between the most and least socioeconomically deprived population quintiles since the introduction of waiting time initiative 1 July 2002 and austerity measures 1 April 2010.
settingAll NHS-funded elective primary hip replacement, primary knee replacement and arthroscopy patient data in Scotland from 1 April 1997 to 31 March 2019.
participantsNHS Scotland funded patients treated in Scotland.
main outcome measuresTrends and changes in mean waiting time.
resultsThere were 135,176, 122,883 and 173,976 NHS funded hip replacement, knee replacement and arthroscopy patients, respectively, in Scotland between 1 April 1997 and 31 March 2019. From 1 July 2002 to 31 March 2010, waiting time inequality between the most and least deprived patients fell and increased thereafter. For hip replacements before 1 July 2002, waiting time inequality increased 1.07 days per quarter; this changed at 1 July 2002 with significant slope change of -2.32 (-3.53, -1.12) days resulting in a decreasing rate of inequality of -1.26 days per quarter. On 1 April 2010 the slope changed significantly by 1.84 (0.90, 2.78) days restoring increasing inequality at 0.58 days per quarter. Knee replacements and arthroscopies had similar results.
conclusionsThe waiting time initiative in Scotland is associated with a reduction in waiting time inequality benefiting the most socioeconomically deprived patients. Austerity measures may be reversing these gains.
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.