Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42802259›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026

Introducing FRAM as a tool for surgical process modeling: a case study for understanding surgical scheduling complexity.

Sidra Rashid, Rebecca Weber, Alexander Geiger, Lars Wagner, Lukas Bernhard, Emily Spicker, Alissa Jell, Johannes Fottner, Dirk Wilhelm, Niklas Grabbe

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Sidra RashidMITI Research Group, TUM School of Medicine and Health, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, Munich, 81675, Bavaria, Germany. sidra.rashid@tum.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-0068-5273
Rebecca WeberChair of Materials Handling, Material Flow, and Logistics, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstraße 15, Garching, 85748, Bavaria, Germany.
Alexander GeigerMITI Research Group, TUM School of Medicine and Health, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, Munich, 81675, Bavaria, Germany.
Lars WagnerMITI Research Group, TUM School of Medicine and Health, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, Munich, 81675, Bavaria, Germany.
Lukas BernhardMITI Research Group, TUM School of Medicine and Health, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, Munich, 81675, Bavaria, Germany.
Emily SpickerMITI Research Group, TUM School of Medicine and Health, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, Munich, 81675, Bavaria, Germany.
Alissa JellMITI Research Group, TUM School of Medicine and Health, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, Munich, 81675, Bavaria, Germany.
Johannes FottnerChair of Materials Handling, Material Flow, and Logistics, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstraße 15, Garching, 85748, Bavaria, Germany.
Dirk WilhelmMITI Research Group, TUM School of Medicine and Health, University Hospital rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Str. 22, Munich, 81675, Bavaria, Germany.
Niklas GrabbeChair of Ergonomics, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstraße 15, Garching, 85748, Bavaria, Germany.

Funding

Bayerische Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Landesentwicklung und Energie DIK0628/02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSurgical processes are inherently variable leading to unexpected delays and cancellations. Due to inefficient and outdated processes, there is a need to understand and improve potential bottlenecks. However, traditional surgical process models (SPMs) focus on intraoperative procedures and sequential workflows, but most cannot adequately capture parallel workflows, variability, and sociotechnical interactions. We propose the use of Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) in conjunction with FRAMalyse to enable systematic measurement of variability propagation and potential process bottleneck identification. Additionally, we introduce a structured FRAM Model Interpreter (FMI) cycle-mapping interpretation protocol that maps function activations across cycles to temporal process phases, an approach for interpreting FRAM simulation outputs that has not been used in prior qualitative applications of the method. MATERIAL AND

methodsBased on stakeholder interviews and workflow observations, we developed a FRAM model of the daily surgical scheduling process at University Hospital Technical University of Munich (TUM). FMI profiles for each function were determined based on expert interviews and function activations were recorded during model simulation. Additionally, the model was analyzed using FRAMalyse to identify functions with high variability potential arising from their coupling structure, thereby providing a basis for future bottleneck validation and surgical scheduling optimization.

resultsWe identified 98 interconnected FRAM functions across four agents and phases. Scheduling and rescheduling functions spanned multiple cycles, indicating continuous and reciprocal coordination. Surgical team allocation function showed the highest variability, while attending surgeons performed the most functions and central patient management (CPM) had the highest coupling density.

conclusionThis study introduces the first quantitative application of FRAM and FRAMalyse in the healthcare domain, systematically identifying candidate bottlenecks across the full surgical scheduling pathway as a foundation for process improvement.

Indexed as

Functional resonance analysis methodOperating room schedulingSurgical process modelingSurgical scheduling

Identifiers

PMID42802259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.