The effect of overlapping surgical scheduling on operating theatre productivity: a narrative review

Lack of Validity of Absolute Percentage Errors in Estimated Operating Room Case Durations as a Measure of Operating Room Performance: A Focused Narrative Review

Commonly reported end points for operating room (OR) and surgical scheduling performance are the percentages of estimated OR times whose absolute values differ from the actual OR times by ≥15%, or by various intervals from ≥5 to ≥60 minutes. We show that these metrics are invalid assessments of OR performance. Specifically, from 19 relevant articles, multiple OR management decisions that would increase OR efficiency or productivity would also increase the absolute percentage error of the estimated case durations. Instead, OR managers should check the mean bias of estimated OR times (ie, systematic underestimation or overestimation), a valid and reliable metric.

Larger anesthesia practitioner per operating room ratios are needed to prevent unnecessary non-operative time than to mitigate patient risk: A narrative review

When choosing the anesthesia practitioner to operating room (OR) ratio for a hospital, objectives are applied to mitigate patient risk: 1) ensuring sufficient anesthesiologists to meet requirements for presence during critical intraoperative events (e.g., anesthesia induction) and 2) ensuring sufficient numbers to cover emergencies outside the ORs (e.g., emergent reintubation in the post-anesthesia care unit). At a 24-OR suite with each anesthesiologist supervising residents in 2 ORs, because critical events overlapped among ORs, ≥14 anesthesiologists were needed to be present for all critical events on >90% of days. The suitable anesthesia practitioner to OR ratio would be 1.58, where 1.58 = (24 + 14)/24. Our narrative review of 22 studies from 17 distinct hospitals shows that the practitioner to OR ratio needed to reduce non-operative time is reliably even larger. Activities to reduce non-operative times include performing preoperative evaluations, making prompt evidence-based decisions at the OR control desk, giving breaks during cases (e.g., lunch or lactation sessions), and using induction and block rooms in parallel to OR cases. The reviewed articles counted the frequency of these activities, finding them much more common than urgent patient-care events. Our review shows, also, that 1 anesthesiologist per OR, working without assistants, is often more expensive, from a societal perspective, than having a few more anesthesia practitioners (i.e., ratio > 1.00). These results are generalizable among hundreds of hospitals, based on managerial epidemiology studies. The implication of our narrative review is that existing studies have already shown, functionally, that artificial intelligence and monitoring technologies based on increasing the safety of intraoperative care have little to no potential to influence anesthesia or OR productivity. There are, in contrast, opportunities to use sensor data and decision-support to facilitate communication among anesthesiologists outside of ORs to choose optimal task sequences that reduce non-operative times, thereby increasing production and OR efficiency.

Critical Portions of a Foot or Ankle Surgical Procedure From Patient and Surgeon Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, overlapping procedures in orthopaedic surgery have come under increased public scrutiny. Central to this discussion is what should constitute a "critical portion" of any surgical procedure-a definition which may differ between patients and surgeons. This study therefore aimed to assess which components of three common foot and ankle procedures are considered "critical" from both the patient and surgeon perspectives.

METHODS

For this survey-based study, questionnaires were administered to patients who presented to an orthopaedic foot and ankle clinic and separately administered to foot and ankle surgeons through e-mail. The questionnaires broached all steps involved in three common foot and ankle procedures: open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fracture, Achilles tendon repair, and ankle arthroscopy. Respondents were asked to characterize each step as "always critical," "often critical," sometimes critical," rarely critical," or "never critical." A combined "always critical" and "often critical" response rate of greater than 50% was used to define a step as genuinely critical. Patient and surgeon responses were thereafter compared using Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests ( P -value <0.05 was considered significant).

RESULTS

Notably, both patients and surgeons considered informed consent, preoperative marking of the surgical site, preoperative time-out, surgical soft-tissue dissection, and certain procedure-specific steps (critical portions) of these procedures. By contrast, only patients considered skin incision and wound closure to be critical steps.

CONCLUSION

Patients and surgeons were largely in agreement as to what should comprise the critical portions of several common foot and ankle procedures. Certain discrepancies did exist, however, such as skin incision and closure, and both groups were also in general agreement regarding what was not considered a critical component of these operations. Such findings highlight a potential opportunity for improved preoperative patient education and patient-physician communication.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV: Evidence from well-designed case-control or cohort studies.

Modelling the economic constraints and consequences of anaesthesia associate expansion in the UK National Health Service: a narrative review

Shortages in the physician anaesthesia workforce have led to proposals to introduce new staff groups, notably in the UK National Health Service (NHS) Anaesthesia Associates (AAs) who have shorter training periods than doctors and could potentially contribute to workflow efficiencies in several ways. We analysed the economic viability of the most efficient staffing model, previously endorsed by both the UK Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Association of Anaesthetists, wherein one physician supervises two AAs across two operating lists (1:2 model). For this model to be economically rational (something which neither national organisation considered), the employment cost of the two AAs should be equal to or less than that of a single supervisor physician (i.e. AAs should be paid <50% of the supervisor's salary). As the supervisor can be an autonomous specialty and specialist (SAS) doctor, this sets the economically viable AA salary envelope at less than £40,000 per year. However, we report that actual advertised AA salaries greatly exceed this, with even student AAs paid up to £48,472. Economically, one way to justify such salaries is for AAs to become autonomous such that they eventually replace SAS doctors at a lower cost. We discuss some other options that might increase AA productivity to justify these salaries (e.g. ≥1:3 staffing ratios), but the medico-political consequences of each of them are also profound. Alternatively, the AA programme should be terminated as economically nonviable. These results have implications for any country seeking to introduce new models of working in anaesthesia.

A Comparison of Surgeon Estimated Times and Actual Operative Times in Pediatric Dental Rehabilitation under General Anesthesia. A Retrospective Study

This retrospective study aimed to compare the accuracy of the pediatric dental surgeon's estimated operative times for dental rehabilitation under general anesthesia (DRGA) in pediatric patients. This study population included 674 pediatric patients who underwent DRGA at the study facility between January 2022 and December 2022, using convenience sampling to select patients who met our inclusion criteria. Data were collected from electronic medical and anesthesia records based on several factors, including patient-related factors such as age and gender, surgeon-related factors such as rank and experience, and anesthesia-related factors such as induction and recovery time (in minutes). This study highlights a significant difference between the surgeon's estimated time (SET) and actual operative time (AOT) for pediatric DRGA procedures, with a mean difference of 19.28 min (SD = 43.17, p < 0.0001), indicating a tendency for surgeons to overestimate surgery time. Surgical procedure time was the strongest predictor of this discrepancy, with an R square value of 0.427 and a significant p-value of 0.000. Experience with surgeons, anesthesia induction, and recovery time were also significant predictors. Meanwhile, age, gender, and rank of surgeons did not significantly predict the difference between SET and AOT. Therefore, the study suggests that surgeons should adjust their estimates for pediatric DRGA procedures, specifically emphasizing a more accurate estimation of surgery time, to ensure adequate resource allocation and patient outcomes.

Getting operating theatre metrics right to underpin quality improvement: understanding limitations of NHS Model Hospital calculations

The Model Hospital is an NHS online resource summarising performance data for, amongst other things, operating theatres categorised by NHS Trust and specialty. As an official source of information, it might be assumed that metrics, such as 'average late start time', 'average early finish time', and 'average late finish time', are calculated in a way to reflect performance in these domains, but this is not the case. These values are, respectively, only for those lists that start late, finish early, and finish late, with the number of lists in each category unreported. The Model Hospital reports utilisation appropriately as 'touch time' (the time delivering anaesthesia and surgery) but prefers a 'capped' measure, in which any touch time occurring in late finishes is ignored. The Model Hospital aggregates utilisations across lists in a mathematically invalid way, which leads to the assumption that small aliquots of unused time on lists can be combined to create larger time blocks, in which to complete more operations. We present alternative, more intuitive, and mathematically conventional methods to derive performance metrics using the same data. The results have implications for hospitals developing their own dashboards and international organisations seeking to create national databases for operating theatre performance.