We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Statistical modeling to predict elective surgery time. Comparison with a computer scheduling system and surgeon-provided estimates.
Anesthesiology 1996 December
BACKGROUND: Accurate estimation of operating times is a prerequisite for the efficient scheduling of the operating suite. The authors, in this study, sought to compare surgeons' time estimates for elective cases with those of commercial scheduling software, and to ascertain whether improvements could be made by regression modeling.
METHODS: The study was conducted at the University of Washington Medical Center in three phases. Phase 1 retrospectively reviewed surgeons' time estimates and the scheduling system's estimates throughout 1 yr. In phase 2, data were collected prospectively from participating surgeons by means of a data entry form completed at the time of scheduling elective cases. Data included the procedure code, estimated operating time, estimated case difficulty, and potential factors that might affect the duration. In phase 3, identical data were collected from five selected surgeons by personal interview.
RESULTS: In phase 1, 26 of 43 surgeons provided significantly better estimates than did the scheduling system (P < 0.01), and no surgeon was significantly worse, although the absolute errors were large (34% of 157 min average case length). In phase 2, modeling improved the accuracy of the surgeons' estimates by 11.5%, compared with the scheduling system. In phase 3, applying the model from phase 2 improved the accuracy of the surgeons' estimates by 18.2%.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons provide more accurate time estimates than does the scheduling software as it is used in our institution. Regression modeling effects modest improvements in accuracy. Further improvements would be likely if the hospital information system could provide timely historical data and feedback to the surgeons.
METHODS: The study was conducted at the University of Washington Medical Center in three phases. Phase 1 retrospectively reviewed surgeons' time estimates and the scheduling system's estimates throughout 1 yr. In phase 2, data were collected prospectively from participating surgeons by means of a data entry form completed at the time of scheduling elective cases. Data included the procedure code, estimated operating time, estimated case difficulty, and potential factors that might affect the duration. In phase 3, identical data were collected from five selected surgeons by personal interview.
RESULTS: In phase 1, 26 of 43 surgeons provided significantly better estimates than did the scheduling system (P < 0.01), and no surgeon was significantly worse, although the absolute errors were large (34% of 157 min average case length). In phase 2, modeling improved the accuracy of the surgeons' estimates by 11.5%, compared with the scheduling system. In phase 3, applying the model from phase 2 improved the accuracy of the surgeons' estimates by 18.2%.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons provide more accurate time estimates than does the scheduling software as it is used in our institution. Regression modeling effects modest improvements in accuracy. Further improvements would be likely if the hospital information system could provide timely historical data and feedback to the surgeons.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app