Evaluation of Variability in Operative Efficiency in Plastic Surgery Procedures
As the cost of healthcare rises, it is imperative to assess value delivered to patients and impact on the economic viability of institutions. We aimed to characterize plastic surgery operative time management and identified areas for efficiency improvement. Procedures from a US academic plastic surg...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of plastic surgery 2022-06, Vol.88 (6), p.e13-e19 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e19 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | e13 |
container_title | Annals of plastic surgery |
container_volume | 88 |
creator | Boson, Alexis L. Ross, Evan Popp, Daniel Tapking, Christian Ramirez, Arianna Branski, Ludwik Phillips, Linda G. Wolf, Steven E. |
description | As the cost of healthcare rises, it is imperative to assess value delivered to patients and impact on the economic viability of institutions. We aimed to characterize plastic surgery operative time management and identified areas for efficiency improvement.
Procedures from a US academic plastic surgery division from September 2017 to August 2018 were reviewed. Times were categorized into preparation (patient in room to incision), procedure (incision to closure), exit (closure to patient exiting room), and turnover (patient out of room to next patient in room). Median and interquartile ranges were calculated. Procedures were classified by relative value units (RVUs) for comparison of procedure complexities and resources. Components were plotted against RVUs; r2 values were calculated.
We analyzed 522 cases; 69 were excluded for missing data, primary surgeon not a plastic surgeon, emergent cases, or burn procedures; a total of 453 cases were analyzed. Median and interquartile range (in minutes) for preparation was (34, 18 minutes; 23% of total), procedure (53, 75 minutes; 36% of total), exit (30, 27 minutes; 20% of total), and turnover (30, 26 minutes; 20% of total). Normalized to RVUs, preparation demonstrated the most variability (r2 = 0.19), followed by exit (r2 = 0.38), and procedure (r2 = 0.57). Average work RVUs per month was 678.1 ± 158.7. Average work RVUs per OR hour was 7.2.
The largest component with greatest variability was preparation for surgery in the OR. Improved efficiency by decreasing variability increases the value of healthcare delivered to patients and OR throughput. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003096 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9179041</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2669503392</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3687-101022c0501fad3d942adbc17610468d7b2cb82b889d4ce1686a527b4fffbc793</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkV1LHDEUhkNpqVvbfyAyl70Ze_Ix-bgRRNZaEHbB6m3IZBI3mp2syczK_vuOXWttA4dwPt4n4bwIHWE4waDEt-uz5Qm8ORQUf4dmuKG8pgLkezQDzGQtgNED9KmUewBMJOMf0QFtOCYNbWZoMd-aOJohpL5Kvro1OZg2xDDsqtBXi43LU2_rqrn3wQbX29_1ZTRlCLa6HvOdy7tqmZN13Zhd-Yw-eBOL-_JyH6Kbi_nP88v6avH9x_nZVW0pl6LGgIEQCw1gbzraKUZM11osOAbGZSdaYltJWilVx6zDXHLTENEy731rhaKH6HTP3Yzt2nXW9UM2UW9yWJu808kE_W-nDyt9l7ZaYaGA4Qnw9QWQ0-PoyqDXoVgXo-ldGosmnKsGKFVkGmX7UZtTKdn512cw6Gcv9OSF_t-LSXb89ouvoj_L_8t9SnFwuTzE8cllvXImDqs9j1NRk2lTwKekngIL-gtGNpVJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2669503392</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of Variability in Operative Efficiency in Plastic Surgery Procedures</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Boson, Alexis L. ; Ross, Evan ; Popp, Daniel ; Tapking, Christian ; Ramirez, Arianna ; Branski, Ludwik ; Phillips, Linda G. ; Wolf, Steven E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Boson, Alexis L. ; Ross, Evan ; Popp, Daniel ; Tapking, Christian ; Ramirez, Arianna ; Branski, Ludwik ; Phillips, Linda G. ; Wolf, Steven E.</creatorcontrib><description>As the cost of healthcare rises, it is imperative to assess value delivered to patients and impact on the economic viability of institutions. We aimed to characterize plastic surgery operative time management and identified areas for efficiency improvement.
Procedures from a US academic plastic surgery division from September 2017 to August 2018 were reviewed. Times were categorized into preparation (patient in room to incision), procedure (incision to closure), exit (closure to patient exiting room), and turnover (patient out of room to next patient in room). Median and interquartile ranges were calculated. Procedures were classified by relative value units (RVUs) for comparison of procedure complexities and resources. Components were plotted against RVUs; r2 values were calculated.
We analyzed 522 cases; 69 were excluded for missing data, primary surgeon not a plastic surgeon, emergent cases, or burn procedures; a total of 453 cases were analyzed. Median and interquartile range (in minutes) for preparation was (34, 18 minutes; 23% of total), procedure (53, 75 minutes; 36% of total), exit (30, 27 minutes; 20% of total), and turnover (30, 26 minutes; 20% of total). Normalized to RVUs, preparation demonstrated the most variability (r2 = 0.19), followed by exit (r2 = 0.38), and procedure (r2 = 0.57). Average work RVUs per month was 678.1 ± 158.7. Average work RVUs per OR hour was 7.2.
The largest component with greatest variability was preparation for surgery in the OR. Improved efficiency by decreasing variability increases the value of healthcare delivered to patients and OR throughput.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0148-7043</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1536-3708</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003096</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35612535</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</publisher><subject>Efficiency ; Humans ; Operative Time ; Plastic Surgery Procedures ; Surgeons ; Surgery, Plastic</subject><ispartof>Annals of plastic surgery, 2022-06, Vol.88 (6), p.e13-e19</ispartof><rights>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3687-101022c0501fad3d942adbc17610468d7b2cb82b889d4ce1686a527b4fffbc793</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3687-101022c0501fad3d942adbc17610468d7b2cb82b889d4ce1686a527b4fffbc793</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,315,781,785,886,27928,27929</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35612535$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Boson, Alexis L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, Evan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popp, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tapking, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramirez, Arianna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Branski, Ludwik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Linda G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolf, Steven E.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of Variability in Operative Efficiency in Plastic Surgery Procedures</title><title>Annals of plastic surgery</title><addtitle>Ann Plast Surg</addtitle><description>As the cost of healthcare rises, it is imperative to assess value delivered to patients and impact on the economic viability of institutions. We aimed to characterize plastic surgery operative time management and identified areas for efficiency improvement.
Procedures from a US academic plastic surgery division from September 2017 to August 2018 were reviewed. Times were categorized into preparation (patient in room to incision), procedure (incision to closure), exit (closure to patient exiting room), and turnover (patient out of room to next patient in room). Median and interquartile ranges were calculated. Procedures were classified by relative value units (RVUs) for comparison of procedure complexities and resources. Components were plotted against RVUs; r2 values were calculated.
We analyzed 522 cases; 69 were excluded for missing data, primary surgeon not a plastic surgeon, emergent cases, or burn procedures; a total of 453 cases were analyzed. Median and interquartile range (in minutes) for preparation was (34, 18 minutes; 23% of total), procedure (53, 75 minutes; 36% of total), exit (30, 27 minutes; 20% of total), and turnover (30, 26 minutes; 20% of total). Normalized to RVUs, preparation demonstrated the most variability (r2 = 0.19), followed by exit (r2 = 0.38), and procedure (r2 = 0.57). Average work RVUs per month was 678.1 ± 158.7. Average work RVUs per OR hour was 7.2.
The largest component with greatest variability was preparation for surgery in the OR. Improved efficiency by decreasing variability increases the value of healthcare delivered to patients and OR throughput.</description><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Plastic Surgery Procedures</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>Surgery, Plastic</subject><issn>0148-7043</issn><issn>1536-3708</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkV1LHDEUhkNpqVvbfyAyl70Ze_Ix-bgRRNZaEHbB6m3IZBI3mp2syczK_vuOXWttA4dwPt4n4bwIHWE4waDEt-uz5Qm8ORQUf4dmuKG8pgLkezQDzGQtgNED9KmUewBMJOMf0QFtOCYNbWZoMd-aOJohpL5Kvro1OZg2xDDsqtBXi43LU2_rqrn3wQbX29_1ZTRlCLa6HvOdy7tqmZN13Zhd-Yw-eBOL-_JyH6Kbi_nP88v6avH9x_nZVW0pl6LGgIEQCw1gbzraKUZM11osOAbGZSdaYltJWilVx6zDXHLTENEy731rhaKH6HTP3Yzt2nXW9UM2UW9yWJu808kE_W-nDyt9l7ZaYaGA4Qnw9QWQ0-PoyqDXoVgXo-ldGosmnKsGKFVkGmX7UZtTKdn512cw6Gcv9OSF_t-LSXb89ouvoj_L_8t9SnFwuTzE8cllvXImDqs9j1NRk2lTwKekngIL-gtGNpVJ</recordid><startdate>20220601</startdate><enddate>20220601</enddate><creator>Boson, Alexis L.</creator><creator>Ross, Evan</creator><creator>Popp, Daniel</creator><creator>Tapking, Christian</creator><creator>Ramirez, Arianna</creator><creator>Branski, Ludwik</creator><creator>Phillips, Linda G.</creator><creator>Wolf, Steven E.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220601</creationdate><title>Evaluation of Variability in Operative Efficiency in Plastic Surgery Procedures</title><author>Boson, Alexis L. ; Ross, Evan ; Popp, Daniel ; Tapking, Christian ; Ramirez, Arianna ; Branski, Ludwik ; Phillips, Linda G. ; Wolf, Steven E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3687-101022c0501fad3d942adbc17610468d7b2cb82b889d4ce1686a527b4fffbc793</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Plastic Surgery Procedures</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>Surgery, Plastic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Boson, Alexis L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ross, Evan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popp, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tapking, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramirez, Arianna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Branski, Ludwik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Linda G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolf, Steven E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Annals of plastic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Boson, Alexis L.</au><au>Ross, Evan</au><au>Popp, Daniel</au><au>Tapking, Christian</au><au>Ramirez, Arianna</au><au>Branski, Ludwik</au><au>Phillips, Linda G.</au><au>Wolf, Steven E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of Variability in Operative Efficiency in Plastic Surgery Procedures</atitle><jtitle>Annals of plastic surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Plast Surg</addtitle><date>2022-06-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e13</spage><epage>e19</epage><pages>e13-e19</pages><issn>0148-7043</issn><eissn>1536-3708</eissn><abstract>As the cost of healthcare rises, it is imperative to assess value delivered to patients and impact on the economic viability of institutions. We aimed to characterize plastic surgery operative time management and identified areas for efficiency improvement.
Procedures from a US academic plastic surgery division from September 2017 to August 2018 were reviewed. Times were categorized into preparation (patient in room to incision), procedure (incision to closure), exit (closure to patient exiting room), and turnover (patient out of room to next patient in room). Median and interquartile ranges were calculated. Procedures were classified by relative value units (RVUs) for comparison of procedure complexities and resources. Components were plotted against RVUs; r2 values were calculated.
We analyzed 522 cases; 69 were excluded for missing data, primary surgeon not a plastic surgeon, emergent cases, or burn procedures; a total of 453 cases were analyzed. Median and interquartile range (in minutes) for preparation was (34, 18 minutes; 23% of total), procedure (53, 75 minutes; 36% of total), exit (30, 27 minutes; 20% of total), and turnover (30, 26 minutes; 20% of total). Normalized to RVUs, preparation demonstrated the most variability (r2 = 0.19), followed by exit (r2 = 0.38), and procedure (r2 = 0.57). Average work RVUs per month was 678.1 ± 158.7. Average work RVUs per OR hour was 7.2.
The largest component with greatest variability was preparation for surgery in the OR. Improved efficiency by decreasing variability increases the value of healthcare delivered to patients and OR throughput.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</pub><pmid>35612535</pmid><doi>10.1097/SAP.0000000000003096</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0148-7043 |
ispartof | Annals of plastic surgery, 2022-06, Vol.88 (6), p.e13-e19 |
issn | 0148-7043 1536-3708 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9179041 |
source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
subjects | Efficiency Humans Operative Time Plastic Surgery Procedures Surgeons Surgery, Plastic |
title | Evaluation of Variability in Operative Efficiency in Plastic Surgery Procedures |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-16T20%3A05%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20Variability%20in%20Operative%20Efficiency%20in%20Plastic%20Surgery%20Procedures&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20plastic%20surgery&rft.au=Boson,%20Alexis%20L.&rft.date=2022-06-01&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e13&rft.epage=e19&rft.pages=e13-e19&rft.issn=0148-7043&rft.eissn=1536-3708&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/SAP.0000000000003096&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2669503392%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2669503392&rft_id=info:pmid/35612535&rfr_iscdi=true |