Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40054995›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open quality2025

Service-level interventions to reduce waiting time in outpatient and community health settings may be sustained: a systematic review.

Kim Manderson, Nicholas F Taylor, Annie Lewis, Katherine E Harding

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open quality, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Kim MandersonSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia k.manderson@latrobe.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-9781-5593
Nicholas F TaylorSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9474-2504
Annie LewisSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8143-4956
Katherine E HardingSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0207-7071

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe primary aim of this systematic review of the literature was to determine whether interventions to reduce waiting time in outpatient and community health services can be sustained. The secondary aim was to describe associations between sustainability and features of waiting time interventions and the settings in which they have been implemented.

methodsCINAHL, Medline, Embase and Psych Info databases were searched, combining the search concepts 'waiting time or waiting lists', 'outpatient or community care' and 'sustainability'. Studies were included if they tested a service-level intervention that aimed to reduce waiting in an outpatient or community setting and reported data with a minimum 12-month follow-up period. Data were extracted and analysed using a descriptive synthesis. Methodological quality was evaluated using the mixed-methods appraisal tool (MMAT). Waiting interventions were rated as sustained, partially sustained or not sustained using predetermined criteria. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to describe certainty of evidence for different intervention approaches.

resultsScreening of 7770 studies yielded 22 papers investigating the sustainability of waiting interventions for approximately 150 000 clients. Many were of lesser quality, with 14 not meeting more than 3 of 5 criteria on the MMAT checklist. Intervention types were categorised as referral entry, open access and substitution, used either alone or in combination. There was low certainty evidence that all interventions were associated with sustained reductions in waiting time, often with large effect sizes, but the findings are limited by low methodological quality of many studies and the risk of publication bias.

conclusionReductions in wait times and waiting lists for health services can be achieved and sustained following interventions, but further high-quality research would better inform service providers about what interventions are most effective and provide the greatest return on investment.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesWaiting ListsAmbulatory CareHumansTime FactorsAmbulatory careHealth services researchPatient-centred carePRIMARY CARE

Identifiers

PMID40054995
PMCPMC11891526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.