Surgical waiting lists are inevitable: time to focus on work undertaken

Black, Nick

doi:10.1258/jrsm.97.4.159

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 171 that were left as records eligible for screening the full text, five more were excluded because the full‐text was not available, leaving 166 records for full‐text assessment. Because they did not fulfill the inclusion criteria, another 58 documents were excluded, leaving a final selection of 12 for the intervention syntheses, and 96 documents and references for the qualitative‐conceptual syntheses …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy strategies to reduce waiting times for elective surgery: A scoping review and evidence synthesis

Bachelet

Goyenechea²,

Carrasco

2019

Health Planning & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Objectives The purpose of this evidence‐based review is to identify and describe the interventions that have been implemented to reduce waiting times for major elective surgery. Methods Scoping review and presentation of the results according to the SUPPORT tools. We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, SciELO, DARE‐HTA, and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria for research design were comprehensive. Results We identified 5200 records. After eliminating duplicates and screening by title and abstract, 171 records remained for full‐text assessment, of which 12 were ultimately included for this review because they reported specific interventions and 96 records were included for further reference. The included studies show significant variability regarding elective procedures, population, and type of provider, as well as in the characteristics of the interventions and the settings. All the studies had methodological limitations. We graded the certainty of the evidence as very low. Conclusions According to the evidence found for this review, interventions most likely should be multidimensional, with prioritization strategies on the waiting lists to incorporate equity criteria, together with quality management improvements of the surgical pathways and the use of operating rooms, as well as improvements in the planning of the surgical schedule.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy strategies to reduce waiting times for elective surgery: A scoping review and evidence synthesis

Bachelet

Goyenechea²,

Carrasco

2019

Health Planning & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other associated studies have focussed on waiting lists and waiting time [8][9][10][11][12][13] and no published literature could be identified reporting the patient pathway from referral to THR or TKR surgery with a focus on the public elective surgery system. Current health policy in Australia includes the use of urgency categories for elective surgery procedures in public hospitals, which relate to the period between a patient's initial appointment with an orthopaedic surgeon and receipt of surgery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The journey to total hip or knee replacement

Walters

Mackintosh

Sheppard

2012

Aust. Health Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. Despite the incidence of joint replacements in Australia, there is a paucity of information regarding how patients progress from their referral to their surgery. The aim of this study was to describe a patient pathway from referral to receipt of total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) surgery in South Australian public hospitals.Methods. Patient perspectives of the pathway to THR and TKR surgery were obtained via a postal survey (n = 450) and hospital employee perspectives were attained via semi-structured interviews (n = 19). Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics and interview data were analysed thematically.Results. A typical patient pathway to THR and TKR surgery can be divided into two distinct phases; referral-to-initial appointment (9-24 months), and initial appointment-to-surgery (12-15 months). This gives an overall waiting period between 2 and 3 years for THR or TKR surgery.Conclusions. Waiting times for THR and TKR surgery reported in this study were longer than other reports in the literature. Current Australian health policy does not consider the first (and longest) phase of the patient pathway. Excluding this initial phase could be generating an erroneous perception of the patient pathway to THR or TKR surgery, possibly leading to poorly considered health reforms.

show abstract

“…2 This has been a substantial achievement for a healthcare service in which many believed waiting was not just a necessary rationing mechanism, but an inevitability. 3 The question Lewis and Appleby posed was should and could waiting times be reduced even further? In this article we expand on the options noted by Lewis and Appleby for making further reductions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Their answer was optimistic, and now, nearly two years later, it appears that the NHS as a whole will meet the target 2 . This has been a substantial achievement for a healthcare service in which many believed waiting was not just a necessary rationing mechanism, but an inevitability 3 . The question Lewis and Appleby posed was should and could waiting times be reduced even further?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%