Skip Navigation

British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008 100(2):195-202; doi:10.1093/bja/aem366
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Edward, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by Lemaire, L. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Edward, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by Lemaire, L. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Simulation to analyse planning difficulties at the preoperative assessment clinic

G. M. Edward1, S. F. Das2, S. G. Elkhuizen2, P. J. M. Bakker2, J. A. M. Hontelez3, M. W. Hollmann1,*, B. Preckel1 and L. C. Lemaire1

1 Department of Anaesthesiology
2 Department of Innovation and Process Management, Academic Medical Centre
3 Department of Quantitative Economics, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22700, 1100 DE Amsterdam, The Netherlands

* Corresponding author. E-mail: m.w.hollmann{at}amc.uva.nl

Background: Little research has been performed on designing appointment systems for the preoperative assessment clinic (PAC). We aimed to investigate how two organizational planning difficulties, (i) long access times and (ii) long waiting times, could be analysed systematically.

Methods: Two simulation models were used to test different scenarios to reduce access time and waiting times. First, we determined the number of appointments needed to reduce the access time from 5 weeks to 10 working days for 95% of all patients. Subsequently, we determined how long the consultation time should be, taking patients’ American Society Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status into account, to reduce the maximum waiting time to 10 min for 95% of all patients.

Results: Although we found the actual capacity, that is, consultations per day, to be enough to meet demand, a backlog existed, as the access time for the PAC was 5 weeks. A temporary extra capacity is needed to eliminate this backlog. When the reserved consultation time is 18 min for patients with ASA class I or II and 30 min for patients with ASA class III or IV, the maximum waiting times decrease to 10 min for 95% of all patients.

Conclusions: This study shows that a simulation model is a helpful tool to determine the capacity needed to achieve and to maintain a proposed service level for access times and waiting times. In addition, waiting times at the PAC can be reduced by making the reserved consultation time dependent on patients’ ASA physical status.

Keywords: assessment, preanaesthetic; model, computer simulation; screening; surgery, preoperative period


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
J. G. Hardman, I. K. Moppett, and R. P. Mahajan
Validity, credibility, and applicability: the rise and rise of the surrogate
Br. J. Anaesth., November 1, 2008; 101(5): 595 - 596.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.