ArticleBMJ open quality2026
Decreasing patient appointment waiting days for ultrasound diagnosis in Saint Peter Specialized Hospital: a quality improvement project.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasound examination turnaround time refers to the duration from when a clinician orders the test to when results are reported. In many public hospitals, limited workforce capacity, inefficient workflows and unstructured scheduling contribute to prolonged waiting times for diagnostic imaging. Timely ultrasound diagnosis is essential for appropriate clinical decision-making and patient flow. This project aimed to reduce excessive waiting times for ultrasound appointments in a high-volume public hospital
methodsA Quality Improvement (QI) project was conducted in the Radiology Department of Saint Peter Specialized Hospital between August and November 2022. The aim was to reduce the median waiting time for ultrasound appointments from 28 days to less than 5 days. A root cause analysis (RCA) identified key contributors, including delayed start times, absence of structured scheduling, workflow interruptions and limited machine availability. Driver diagrams and prioritisation matrices informed intervention selection and tested through sequential Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. Interventions included workflow optimisation, extended effective working hours, productivity enhancement, structured appointment scheduling and deployment of point-of-care ultrasound for emergency cases.
resultsThe maximum waiting time for senior radiologist ultrasound appointments decreased from 28 days to ≤5 working days. The backlog for technologist-led examinations was eliminated. Daily productivity increased from 10 to 48 scans per radiologist and from 18 to 65 scans per technologist. Run charts demonstrated progressive and sustained improvement across four PDSA cycles. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The QI project achieved significant reductions in ultrasound waiting times through organisational and workflow redesign without additional funding. Sustainability relied on staff engagement, leadership support and embedding new practices into routine operations. These low-cost, context-appropriate strategies may be applicable to other resource-constrained hospitals facing similar challenges.
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.