ArticleHealth systems (Basingstoke, England)2022
A pull-strategy for the appointment scheduling of surgical patients in a hospital-integrated facility.
Article in Health systems (Basingstoke, England), 2022. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper addresses the daily appointment scheduling (AS) of patients in a hospital-integrated facility where outpatients and inpatients are treated simultaneously and share critical resources. We propose a lean approach based on the pull-strategy "Constant Work in Process" (ConWIP) to develop robust and easy-to-implement AS rules. Our objective is to reduce patients' waiting time and maximise the use rate of resources while considering the global surgical process and stochastic service times. The AS rules based on ConWIP are evaluated using a Discrete-Event-Simulation model. Numerical experiments based on a real-life case study are carried out to assess the proposed appointment rules' performance and compare them to AS rules developed in the literature. The results highlight the robustness of our approach and demonstrate its usefulness in practice.
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.