ArticleBMC health services research2025
Timely access to specialist outpatient care: can applying systems thinking unblock our waiting lists?
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this qualitative study was to focus on review and repeat review outpatients and the structural role they play in exacerbating waitlists for Specialist Outpatient (SOP) services in Queensland. Waitlists, which record the number of patients waiting for an initial consultation (new appointment), are an indicator of a health system under strain. Waiting too long to access SOP can have a detrimental effect on people's health outcomes. Not tackling the structural drivers of waitlists can result in non-systemic, non-sustainable fixes that perpetuate waitlists and detrimental outcomes. Patients should be discharged from specialist care when the episode of care is completed, provided appropriate care is available. When review patients remain in the SOP system, they impact the number of new appointments available.
methodsThis paper uses a feedback systems approach to make transparent the touchpoints, dynamics and impact of review and repeat review appointments on waitlists. The evidence used to construct the causal loop diagrams (CLD) in this paper was an output of Group Model Building (GMB). Two facilitated half-day participatory workshops were held in April and June 2023. The project brought together researchers, consumers, hospital and health services (HHS) specialty clinical leads, General Practitioners (GPs), Executive sponsors, HHS outpatient service managers and analysts to provide hospital and healthcare expert stakeholders an opportunity to translate their collective mental models into meaningful system diagrams which communicated how the outpatient system was working.
resultsThe CLD provided a cross-boundary visual of how the review and repeat review appointment contributes to the waitlist. It shows that the review and repeat review outpatients are a hidden feedback loop contributing to growing waiting lists. In the absence of a discharge planning intervention, they have the potential to become a vicious cycle that grows review appointment demand, consuming the availability of new appointments.
conclusionsA feedback systems approach can enhance SOP system understanding, ultimately shifting policy response in health away from local "firefighting" fixes towards more sustainable systemic solutions which promote timely outpatient access. The results suggest that the review patient process impacts the waitlists and should be viewed as a leverage point in the management of growing specialist outpatient waitlists.
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.