Approaches to reduce surgical waiting time and waitlist
Background
Surgery waiting time refers to the time between a patient’s addition to the surgery waiting list on to their admission to the hospital for surgery.1 In Australia, the measurement of waiting time excludes the time between general practitioners' referral to a specialist outpatient appointment and assessment; and any time spent not ready for surgery, i.e. pending improvement of clinical condition, awaiting a follow-up surgery (staged) which is planned for a certain time after or deferred for personal reasons.2, 3 Surgery waiting list refers to the number of people registered on the list to be admitted for a surgical procedure.*
This living table lists strategies identified in the peer-reviewed and grey-literature with evidence of feasibility and an association with a reduction in waiting times and hospital procedure waiting lists. Literature on surgery waiting time management comprises mostly observational or descriptive studies and lacks robust randomised controlled trials or rigorous comparative studies. However, within the context of health policy research, observational studies are often considered to provide acceptable evidence of effectiveness.
Strategies to reduce waiting time are often introduced as a package and can be influenced by interrelated cultural, environmental, operational and practical factors, such as leadership, engagement, treatment pathways and processes for waitlists or operating rooms.4 Therefore, it can be difficult to quantify the effect of a single measure from others.
Evidence to date points to a system-wide, multi-component and targeted, i.e. by identifying root causes, where actions are needed or bottlenecks, approach to achieving a sustainable and long-term reduction in waiting times and attaining an optimal balance between supply and demand for surgical services.4, 5
Notes on methods
Defining policy and intervention effectiveness: an association with an improvement (either as a standalone or bundled intervention) in direct indicators of waiting time and waitlist, i.e. time to surgery and size of the waiting list; or indirect indicators such as referral rates, cancellation rates, no-show rates, operating room efficiency, bed occupancy, length of hospital stay and early discharge. Policy effectiveness can also be defined as “the extent to which a policy is able to give affect to its stated goals”.6
Strength of evidence is rated as follows:
- Consistent positive evidence of effectiveness
- Limited but promising evidence of effectiveness
- Mixed evidence on effectiveness
- Not possible to determine—no information on impact found
- Consistent negative evidence on effectiveness
* Because waiting list generally do not include waits for specialist outpatient appointments, they cannot be used as a measure of community surgical demand or community waiting time for treatments.
Regular checks are conducted for new content and any updates are highlighted.
Strategies | Evidence on effect | Levers for and influencing factors on effectiveness |
---|---|---|
Increasing supply Expanding capacity in the form of human and material resources to increase surgical activities | Additional funding – additional funding, particularly in the short-term, has been used to:
Across jurisdictions including Canada, UK and Ireland where additional and targeted funding has been allocated to increase surgical activity, varying degree of success in reducing wait times and waitlists has been reported.8, 910 |
|
Publicly funded, privately delivered services – there is consistent positive evidence of effectiveness for select procedures, e.g., surgeries and services identified as high volume low complexity, and imaging and diagnostic testing.7, 8, 17 Encourage the take-up of private health insurance – weak and mixed evidence on effectiveness.
| Multiple evidence reports identify key lessons for leveraging private sector capacity to reduce the surgical waitlists.
| |
Expanding workforce – consistent positive evidence of effectiveness. Specific strategies being implemented across multiple countries include:
| Insufficient numbers of qualified workforce and those in the pipeline can be a limiting factor for system capacity to address the surgical backlog. Short- and long-term workforce actions have been adopted in many jurisdictions.
| |
Expanding roles for non-physicians - consistent positive evidence of effectiveness, particularly when tasks related to preadmission services are shifted to nurses.7, 29 Emerging positive evidence on task shifting from specialist surgeons to primary care providers and allied health professionals for minor low complexity surgeries, including:
| There is evidence and expert consensus that effective implementation of expanding roles for non-physicians requires:
| |
Managing demand Reducing and managing the need for surgical services | Value-based care – limited yet promising evidence of effectiveness, particularly for strategies including:
An online tool predicting improvement in quality of life did not have a significant effect on patients’ willingness for surgery, their treatment preference, or the decision quality.38 | There is evidence and expert consensus that effective implementation of value-based care and reduction of surgeries identified as potentially low-value will require:
|
Review and standardisation of referral criteria – limited yet promising evidence of effectiveness in reducing inappropriate referrals, and subsequently the number of patients being added to the waitlist. This strategy has been associated with an estimated 10% reduction in volume capacity.10 |
| |
Active waiting – limited yet promising evidence of success in reducing the demand for surgeries.
| ||
Waitlist management Processes for adding and managing patients who are currently on the waitlist | Referral process – consistent positive evidence of effectiveness, in particular for the electronic referral systems which support the attachment of documents, i.e. photography, images, test results.4 Triage and prioritisation – consistent positive evidence of effectiveness in reducing waiting times especially when done at the referral stage.40 It has also been associated with better benchmarking and improved practices.7 Commonly used strategies include:
|
|
Centralised queue waiting list – consistent positive evidence of effectiveness in reducing waitlist and promoting utility and equity.24, 45 This approach matches the patient to the next available provider following prioritisation.24 Strategies include:
| This strategy has been implemented in multiple jurisdictions with the following factors being identified as key facilitators of success:
| |
Regular validation of wait lists – limited yet promising evidence of effectiveness. Involves regular assessment of patient conditions, auditing waitlist, keeping patient information up to date and progressing patients along the list accordingly. Strategies include:
| There is evidence and expert consensus that the following actions will likely increase the effectiveness and efficiency of waitlist validation process:
| |
Monitoring – lack of evidence specifically addressing the impact on waiting times and waitlist, however, often used for benchmarking, comparison and quality improvement.7 Strategies include:
| Auditing, performance monitoring and reporting of facilities, units and/or providers for waitlist data accuracy and reasons for cancellations can help to:47-50
| |
Preoperative management Optimising patient clinical conditions, preparing patients for what to expect before, during and after the surgery | Proactive clinical assessment – consistent positive evidence of effectiveness in reducing cancellations, and no-show and subsequently improving efficiency and reducing waitlist.7 Strategies include:
| Effective preoperative management requires the following:
|
Patient education – limited yet promising evidence for effectiveness, particularly for optimising patient conditions prior to scheduled procedures, reducing cancellation and delay rates and improving patient-reported outcomes. Strategies include:
| ||
Treatment space management Arrangement and management of physical infrastructure where the care is delivered | Elective surgical hubs – consistent positive evidence ofeffectiveness. Implemented in multiple countries as a key strategy to reduce the waiting list, with varying degree of success.10, 16, 54, 59 The hubs separate elective care from emergency care and mainly focus on high volume low complexity procedures. Models include:
One-stop centres – limited yet promising evidence of effectiveness in reducing patient visits, referrals and increasing efficiency.54, 61 Key features include consultation, diagnosis, care plan and sometimes treatment in almost a single visit.62, 63 | Evidence from UK suggests that surgical hubs require:
|
Operating theatre efficiency Optimising operating theatre room capacity to process an optimum number of procedures without compromising safety and quality | Operating room scheduling and time allocation –consistent positive evidence of effectiveness for the following strategies:
The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) in England, UK recommends the following actions to increase theatre capacity and utilisation to reduce the waiting times for children and young people. These actions are backed by best practice case studies.
Technology-enabled theatre scheduling systems – emerging evidence of effectiveness in improving operating theatre efficiency.69 | There is evidence and expert consensus that the following contextual and cultural factors can help to improve the operating theatre efficiency:
|
Postoperative management Supporting patient’s early recovery and early discharge home | Bed management – limited but promising evidence for effectiveness in improving patient. Strategies being piloted include:
|
|
Early discharge home, same-day surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) – consistent positive evidence of effectivenessinimproving patient flow, reducing hospital length of stay, readmissions and costs.76-78 Key elements include:
| Key enablers for implementation of early supported discharge include:
| |
Virtual wards or hospital-at-home – limited yet promising evidence of effectiveness, particularly for:
| Key enablers of success include:
| |
Performance management Improving efficiency and productivity by increasing accountability and using financial incentives | Setting targets –consistent positive evidence of effectiveness and implemented across multiple countries.5, 16 Strategies include:
| The enablers for implementation include:
|
Performance linked to payment and/or incentives – consistent positive evidence of effectiveness, especially for reducing waiting time to surgery, increasing day surgery rates and improving other quality and safety outcomes.84, 85 Strategies include:
| A 2016 systematic review on pay-for-performance implementation found that the following factors are likely to support the effective implementation of such programs:
|
References
- Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Waiting times for surgery. Sydney: AIHW; 2023 [cited 5 Jun 2023]. Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/4b7b0346-84b4-435c-bc91-a9beb65413f8/myhospitals-elective-surgery-data.pdf.aspx
- Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. National definitions for elective surgery urgency categories. Sydney: AIHW; 2012 [cited 5 Jun 2023]. Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/509f8a18-73c9-416c-92a5-f5073201df46/15778.pdf.aspx?inline=true
- McIntyre D, Chow CK. Waiting Time as an Indicator for Health Services Under Strain: A Narrative Review. Inquiry. 2020 Jan-Dec;57:46958020910305. DOI: 10.1177/0046958020910305
- Blythe N, Ross S. Strategies to reduce waiting times for elective care. London, UK: The King's Fund; 2022 [cited 23 Jun 2023]. Available from: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/strategies-reduce-waiting-times-elective-care
- Kreindler SA. Policy strategies to reduce waits for elective care: a synthesis of international evidence. Br Med Bull. 2010;95(1):7-32. DOI: 10.1093/bmb/ldq014
- Bali AS, Capano G, Ramesh M. Anticipating and designing for policy effectiveness. Policy Soc. 2019;38(1):1-13. DOI: 10.1080/14494035.2019.1579502
- Stafinski T, Nagase FNI, Brindle ME, et al. Reducing wait times to surgery—an international review. J Hosp Manag Health Policy. 2022;6:29. DOI: 10.21037/jhmhp-21-96
- British Columbia. A Commitment to Surgical Renewal in B.C.: year-end progress report April 2022 - March 2023. British Columbia; 2023 [cited 5 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/health/conducting-health-research/surgical_renewal_year-end_progress_report_april_2022-march_2023.pdf
- NHS England. Elective care 2023/24 priorities. London: NHS England; 2023 [cited 5 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2022/02/PRN00496-elective-care-2023-24-priorities-letter-230523.pdf
- Department of Health Ireland. 2023 Waiting List Action Plan. Dublin: HSE; 2023 [cited 5 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/7044e-2023-waiting-list-action-plan/
- Wennberg EAB, Takata JL, Urbach DR. Elective surgery wait time reduction in Canada: A synthesis of provincial initiatives. Healthc Manag Forum. 2020;33(3):111-9. DOI: 10.1177/0840470419900646
- Lisi D, Siciliani L, Straume OR. Hospital competition under pay-for-performance: Quality, mortality, and readmissions. J Econ Manag Strategy. 2020;29(2):289-314. DOI: 10.1111/jems.12345
- Besley TJ, Bevan G, Burchardi K. Naming and Shaming: The impacts of different regimes on hospital waiting times in England and Wales. CEPR Discussion Paper No DP7306. 2009.
- Cooper Z, Gibbons S, Skellern M. Does competition from private surgical centres improve public hospitals' performance? Evidence from the English National Health Service. J Public Econ. 2018;166:63-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.08.002
- Kondo KK, Damberg CL, Mendelson A, et al. Implementation Processes and Pay for Performance in Healthcare: A Systematic Review. J Gen Intern Med. 2016 Apr;31 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):61-9. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-015-3567-0
- Reed S, Schlepper L, Edwards N. Health System Recovery from Covid-19. London: Nuffield Trust; 2022 [cited 4 Jul]. Available from: https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/research/health-system-recovery-from-covid-19-international-lessons-for-the-nhs
- Campbell G, Speer S. Surge capacity: how to address Ontario’s medical backlog. Ontario: ON360; 2022 [cited 4 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://on360.ca/policy-papers/surge-capacity-how-to-address-ontarios-medical-backlog/#:~:text=Partnering%20with%20the%20private%20sector,existed%20well%20before%20the%20pandemic.
- Chen H, Qian Q, Zhang A. Would Allowing Privately Funded Health Care Reduce Public Waiting Time? Theory and Empirical Evidence from Canadian Joint Replacement Surgery Data. Prod Oper Manag. 2015;24(4):605-18. DOI: 10.1111/poms.12260
- Johar M, Savage E. Do Private Patients have Shorter Waiting Times for Elective Surgery? Evidence from New South Wales Public Hospitals*. Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and policy. 2010 Jun;29(2):128-42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1759-3441.2010.00058.x
- Yang O, Yong J, Zhang Y. Effects of private health insurance on waiting time in public hospitals. Melbourne: Melbourne Institute Applied Economic and Social Research; 2023 [cited 5 Sep 2023]. Available from: https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/4721936/wp2023n09.pdf
- Hagen TP, Holom GH, Amayu KN. Outsourcing day surgery to private for-profit hospitals: the price effects of competitive tendering. Health Econ Policy Law. 2018;13(1):50-67. DOI: 10.1017/S1744133117000019
- Wohlin J, Fischer C, Carlsson KS, et al. As predicted by theory: choice and competition in a publicly funded and regulated regional health system yield improved access and cost control. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 May 1;21(1):406. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06392-6
- Rathnayake D, Clarke M, Jayasinghe V. Patient prioritisation methods to shorten waiting times for elective surgery: A systematic review of how to improve access to surgery. PLoS One. 2021;16(8):e0256578. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256578
- Smith K-l, Meulenbroeks I, Mahmoud Z, et al. Reducing surgical waitlist times in Australia. Sydney: Australian Institute of Health Innovation and NHRMC Partnership Centre for Health System Sustainability; 2020 [cited 23 Jun 2023]. Available from: https://www.healthsystemsustainability.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Waitlist-Surgery-Report-Final.pdf
- van Ginneken E, Siciliani L, Reed S, et al. Addressing backlogs and managing waiting lists during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Eurohealth. 2022;28(1):35-40.
- Orkin AM, Rao S, Venugopal J, et al. Conceptual framework for task shifting and task sharing: an international Delphi study. Hum Resour Health. 2021 May 3;19(1):61. DOI: 10.1186/s12960-021-00605-z
- Hazarika I. Artificial intelligence: opportunities and implications for the health workforce. Int Health. 2020 Jul 1;12(4):241-5. DOI: 10.1093/inthealth/ihaa007
- Lekadir K, Quaglio G, Garmendia AT, et al. Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare-Applications, Risks, and Ethical and Societal Impacts. European Parliament. 2022.
- Hines S, Munday J, Kynoch K. Effectiveness of nurse-led preoperative assessment services for elective surgery: a systematic review update. JBI Evidence Synthesis. 2015;13(6).
- Grota T, Betihavas V, Burston A, et al. Impact of nurse-surgeons on patient-centred outcomes: A systematic review. IJNS Advances. 2022;4:100086. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnsa.2022.100086
- McCormack D, Frankel A, Gallagher J. Minor surgery in primary care has reduced minor surgery waiting lists: a 12-month review. Ir J Med Sci. 2023;192(1):41-3. DOI: 10.1007/s11845-022-02928-9
- Dave R, Roberts S, Bekker J, et al. Utilisation of specialist sonographers for head and neck ultrasound fine-needle aspiration cytology can help shorten waiting lists and improve efficiency of the service. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023;61(1):111-2. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2022.10.006
- European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. Skill-mix Innovation, Effectiveness and Implementation: Improving Primary and Chronic Care. Cambridge; 2022 [cited 5 Sep]. Available from: https://eurohealthobservatory.who.int/publications/m/skill-mix-innovation-effectiveness-and-implementation-improving-primary-and-chronic-care
- Martinez-Gonzalez NA, Rosemann T, Djalali S, et al. Task-Shifting From Physicians to Nurses in Primary Care and its Impact on Resource Utilization: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Med Care Res Rev. Aug 2015;72(4):395-418. DOI: 10.1177/1077558715586297
- Hoeft TJ, Fortney JC, Patel V, et al. Task-Sharing Approaches to Improve Mental Health Care in Rural and Other Low-Resource Settings: A Systematic Review. J Rural Health. Dec 2018;34(1):48-62. DOI: 10.1111/jrh.12229
- Anderson M. Changes in publicly and privately funded care in England following a national programme to reduce provision of low-value elective surgery. Br J Surg. 2023;110(2):209-16. DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac390
- Pitt SC, Dossett LA. Deimplementation of Low-Value Care in Surgery. JAMA Surgery. 2022;157(11):977-8. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.2343
- Zhou Y, Patten L, Spelman T, et al. Predictive Tool Use and Willingness for Surgery in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Mar 4;7(3):e240890. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.0890
- Sypes EE, de Grood C, Clement FM, et al. Understanding the public’s role in reducing low-value care: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):20. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-00986-0
- Rathnayake D, Clark M, Jayasinghe V, et al. Perioperative time-management methods to reduce waiting times for elective surgery: a systematic review. Br J Health Care Manag. 2022;28(12):1-8. DOI: 10.12968/bjhc.2021.0145
- Ringard Å, Hagen TP. Are waiting times for hospital admissions affected by patients' choices and mobility? BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Jul 15;11:170. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-170
- Curtis AJ, Russell CO, Stoelwinder JU, et al. Waiting lists and elective surgery: ordering the queue. Med J Aust. 2010;192(4):217-20.
- Jegatheeswaran L, Tolley N. A Pilot Study of Augmented Intelligence Risk-Based Stratification for Endocrine Surgical Waiting List Prioritisation. Cureus. 2022;14(10).
- Powers J, McGree JM, Grieve D, et al. Managing surgical waiting lists through dynamic priority scoring. Health Care Manag Sci. Jun 2023;26:533-57. DOI: 10.1007/s10729-023-09648-1
- Zaheed D, Barbara C-S, Tina N, et al. What is the influence of single-entry models on access to elective surgical procedures? A systematic review. BMJ Open. 2017;7(2):e012225. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012225
- Rathnayake D, Clarke M. The effectiveness of different patient referral systems to shorten waiting times for elective surgeries: systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):155. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06140-w
- Spazzapan M, Javier P, Abu-Ghanem Y, et al. Reducing last-minute cancellations of elective urological surgery-effectiveness of specialist nurse preoperative assessment. Int J Qual Health Care. 16 Mar 2023;35(1). DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzad008
- Prang K-H, Maritz R, Sabanovic H, et al. Mechanisms and impact of public reporting on physicians and hospitals’ performance: A systematic review (2000–2020). PLOS ONE. 2021;16(2):e0247297. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247297
- Campanella P, Vukovic V, Parente P, et al. The impact of Public Reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. Jul 2016;16(1):296. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-016-1543-y
- Renzi C, Sorge C, Fusco D, et al. Reporting of quality indicators and improvement in hospital performance: the P. Re. Val. E. Regional Outcome Evaluation Program. Health Serv Res. 2012;47(5):1880-901.
- Kristoffersen EW, Opsal A, Tveit TO, et al. Effectiveness of pre-anaesthetic assessment clinic: a systematic review of randomised and non-randomised prospective controlled studies. BMJ Open. 11 May 2022;12(5):e054206. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054206
- He J, Gallego B, Stubbs C, et al. Improving patient flow and satisfaction: An evidence-based pre-admission clinic and transfer of care pathway for elective surgery patients. Collegian. 2018;25(2):149-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.colegn.2017.04.006
- Díez-García C, Saladich IG, Ribas IB. Effectiveness of Nurse-led Preoperative Assessment for Anesthesia: A Prospective Cohort Study. J Perianesth Nurs. 2023;38(4):595-603. DOI: 10.1016/j.jopan.2022.10.007
- Williamson A, Patel P. Modelling the economic benefits of reducing elective waiting lists in the NHS. United Kingdom: Institute for Public Policy Research; 2023 [cited 23 April 2024]. Available from: https://www.ippr.org/articles/waiting-for-prosperity
- Matulis J, Liu S, Mecchella J, et al. Choosing Wisely: A Quality Improvement Initiative to Decrease Unnecessary Preoperative Testing. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2017;6(1). DOI: 10.1136/bmjquality.u216281.w6691
- Aardoom JJ, Hilt AD, Woudenberg T, et al. A Preoperative Virtual Reality App for Patients Scheduled for Cardiac Catheterization: Pre-Post Questionnaire Study Examining Feasibility, Usability, and Acceptability. JMIR Cardio. 2022;6(1):e29473. DOI: 10.2196/29473
- Pan S, Rong LQ. Mobile Applications in Clinical and Perioperative Care for Anesthesia: Narrative Review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(9):e25115. DOI: 10.2196/25115
- Hogan S. Know Before You Go: Transforming Surgical Access. Sydney: ACI; 2022 [cited 6 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://aci.health.nsw.gov.au/ie/projects/know-before-you-go
- Royal College of Surgeons of England. The case for surgical hubs. England [cited 14 Jun 2023]. Available from: https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/about-the-rcs/government-relations-and-consultation/position-statements-and-reports/the-case-for-surgical-hubs/
- Coulson R, Small S, Spence R, et al. Regional Elective Day Procedure Centre Pilot- the solution to waiting lists and trainee deficit in the reshaping of services following COVID-19? Ulster Med J. 2024 Jan;92(3):129-33.
- Carty N, Curtis N, Ranaboldo C. Single hospital visit day case laparoscopic hernia repair without prior outpatient consultation is safe and acceptable to patients. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:5565-71.
- Dreuning KMA, Derikx JPM, Ouali A, et al. One-Stop Surgery: An Innovation to Limit Hospital Visits in Children. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2021;32(05):435-42. DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740158
- AlShareef Y, AlShammary SA, Abuzied Y, et al. Impact of one-stop clinic on the clearance of COVID-19 surgical backlog. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2022;16(2):27-31.
- Furrer MA, Ahmad I, Noel J, et al. High-intensity theatre (HIT) lists to tackle the elective surgery backlog. Nat Rev Urol. 2023 Aug;20(8):453-4. DOI: 10.1038/s41585-023-00775-6
- Halim UA, Khan MA, Ali AM. Strategies to Improve Start Time in the Operating Theatre: a Systematic Review. J Med Syst. 2018;42(9):160. DOI: 10.1007/s10916-018-1015-5
- Bellini V, Guzzon M, Bigliardi B, et al. Artificial Intelligence: A New Tool in Operating Room Management. Role of Machine Learning Models in Operating Room Optimization. J Med Syst. 2019;44(1):20. DOI: 10.1007/s10916-019-1512-1
- Rozario D. Can machine learning optimize the efficiency of the operating room in the era of COVID-19? Can J Surg. 2020;63(6):E527-e9. DOI: 10.1503/cjs.016520
- Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT). Closing the gap: Actions to reduce waiting times for children and young people. London: GIRFT; 2023 [cited 20 Oct 2023]. Available from: https://gettingitrightfirsttime.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Closing-the-gap-Actions-to-reduce-waiting-times-for-children-and-young-people-FINAL-V2-September-2023.pdf
- Healthcare Improvement Scotland. Technology-enabled theatre scheduling systems. Dublin: Health Improvement Scotland; 2023 [cited 01 Mar 2024]. Available from: https://shtg.scot/our-advice/technology-enabled-theatre-scheduling-systems/
- Nicolay CR, Purkayastha S, Greenhalgh A, et al. Systematic review of the application of quality improvement methodologies from the manufacturing industry to surgical healthcare. Br J Surg. 2012;99(3):324-35. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.7803
- Healey T, El-Othmani MM, Healey J, et al. Improving Operating Room Efficiency, Part 1: General Managerial and Preoperative Strategies. JBJS Reviews. 2015;3(10):e3. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.N.00109
- Hassanzadeh H, Boyle J, Khanna S, et al. Daily surgery caseload prediction: towards improving operating theatre efficiency. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022;22(1):151. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-022-01893-8
- Spence C, Shah OA, Cebula A, et al. Machine learning models to predict surgical case duration compared to current industry standards: scoping review. BJS Open. 2023 Nov 1;7(6). DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrad113
- Meacock J, Mukherjee S, Sheikh A. Increasing patient flow through neurosurgical critical care: the Leeds Improvement Method. BMJ Open Qual. 2021;10(2):e001143. DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2020-001143
- Braaksma A, Copenhaver MS, Zenteno AC, et al. Evaluation and implementation of a Just-In-Time bed-assignment strategy to reduce wait times for surgical inpatients. Health Care Manag Sci. 2023;26:501-15. DOI: 10.1007/s10729-023-09638-3
- Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A Review. JAMA Surgery. 2017;152(3):292-8. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4952
- NSW Agency for Clinical Innovation. Resuming elective surgery - Post-surgery innovations: enhanced recovery after surgery, early mobilisation and discharge. Sydney: ACI; 2020 [cited 6 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://aci.health.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/594520/Evidence-Check-Resuming-elective-surgery-post-surgery-innovations-enhanced-recovery-early-mobilisation-and-discharge.pdf
- Mui J, Cheng E, Salindera S. Enhanced recovery after surgery for oncological breast surgery reduces length of stay in a resource limited setting. ANZ Journal of Surgery. 2024 2024/03/15;n/a(n/a). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.18901
- Quemby DJ, Stocker ME. Day surgery development and practice: key factors for a successful pathway. Continuing Education in Anaesthesia Critical Care and Pain. 2014;14(6):256-61. DOI: 10.1093/bjaceaccp/mkt066
- Bailey CR, Ahuja M, Bartholomew K, et al. Guidelines for day-case surgery 2019. Anaesthesia. 2019;74(6):778-92. DOI: 10.1111/anae.14639
- NSW Agency for Clinical Innovation. Enhanced recovery after surgery: key principles for implementation of models. Sydney: ACI; 2023 [cited 6 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://aci.health.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/836104/ACI-ERAS-Key-Principles-for-implementation-of-models.pdf
- Sultan A, Hussain MI, Sellahewa C, et al. EGS P05 Surgical Same Day Emergency Care at a District General Hospital - Our Experience. Br J Surg. 2022;109(Supplement_9):znac404.070. DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac404.070
- NHS England. Preoperative virtual ward reducing bed occupancy through monitoring of hot gallbladder. London: NHS England; 2023 [cited 6 Jul 2023]. Available from: https://transform.england.nhs.uk/key-tools-and-info/digital-playbooks/perioperative-digital-playbook/preoperative-virtual-ward-reducing-bed-occupancy-through-monitoring-of-hot-gallbladder/
- Metcalfe D, Zogg CK, Judge A, et al. Pay for performance and hip fracture outcomes an interrupted time series and difference-in-differences analysis in England and Scotland. Bone Joint J. 2019;101-B(8):1015-23. DOI: doi:10.1302/0301-620X.101B8.BJJ-2019-0173.R1
- Zogg CK, Metcalfe D, Judge A, et al. Learning From England's Best Practice Tariff: Process Measure Pay-for-Performance Can Improve Hip Fracture Outcomes. Ann Surg. 2022;275(3):506-14. DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004305
- Milstein R, Schreyoegg J. Pay for performance in the inpatient sector: A review of 34 P4P programs in 14 OECD countries. Health Policy. 2016;120(10):1125-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.08.009
- Vlaanderen FP, Tanke MA, Bloem BR, et al. Design and effects of outcome-based payment models in healthcare: a systematic review. Eur J Health Econ. 2019;20(2):217-32. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-018-0989-8
- Kreutzberg A, Eckhardt H, Milstein R, et al. International strategies, experiences, and payment models to incentivise day surgery. Health Policy. 2023 2023/12/17/:104968. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2023.104968
Notes
* Preliminary data, not fully established, in some cases small numbers or short follow up; interpret with caution
^ Commentary, grey literature, pre peer review or news
The "last updated" date refers to the date when the evidence was last reviewed.
Living evidence tables include some links to low quality sources and an assessment of the original source has not been undertaken. Sources are monitored regularly but due to rapidly emerging information, tables may not always reflect the most current evidence. The tables are not peer reviewed, and inclusion does not imply official recommendation nor endorsement of NSW Health.
Last updated on 10 Apr 2024