‘There are too many of us to fix.’ Patients’ views of acceptable waiting times for hip and knee replacement

Conner‐Spady, Barbara; Sanmartin, Claudia; Johnston, Geoffrey; McGurran, John; Kehler, Melissa D.; Noseworthy, Tom

doi:10.1258/jhsrp.2009.008128

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Waiting for health services that are more fundamental for acceptable survival in everyday life, like cataract or hip and knee replacement surgery, could be expected to cause more inconvenience. The maximum acceptable waiting times for such surgery is similar to or even longer [14][15][16][17] than that expressed by dental patients in the present study. This discrepancy can be interpreted as an indication that dental services are relatively highly valued by patients.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Patient experiences during waiting time for dental treatment

Tuominen

Eriksson

2011

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Patient experiences during waiting time for dental treatment

Tuominen

Eriksson

2011

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Not only were participants in this study satisfied with the service they received while waiting for THR and TKR, they displayed a degree of altruism consistent with other patient groups [27][28][29][30]. Patient satisfaction was found to be associated with the period of waiting for an initial consultation, which to date has been overlooked in the establishment of waiting time targets in Australia.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 52%

Expectations Confounded: Patients Are Satisfied with THR and TKR Delivery in Australian Public Hospitals—A Multisite Case Study

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. The popular media infer that satisfaction with waiting lists for total hip or knee replacement surgery is poor; however, there is little supporting evidence for this. The purpose of this study was to describe patients satisfaction with the service they received for joint replacement surgery in a public hospital. Methods. A cross-sectional design was used to survey 450 patients. Data was analysed descriptively and chi-squared analyses (significance level of P < 0.05) were used to examine associations between variables. Results. The response rate was 71%. Nearly three-quarters (n = 312) of the sample were "very happy" with the service and 92.0% (n = 379) indicated that they would have their surgery again. Satisfaction was significantly associated with waiting time to the first appointment (chi-square; P = 0.002), whether the patients enquired about their waiting time (chisquare; P = 0.003), and the number of preoperative appointments (chisquare; P = 0.04). Most participants reported a maximum acceptable waiting period for initial appointment of less than 6 months but nearly half waited longer. Conclusions. The perception that patients are unhappy with elective surgery services in Australia may be unfounded despite many waiting longer than they consider appropriate.

show abstract

“…Conner-Spady et al [4] found that patients thought that the maximum acceptable waiting time should be 4 months, well below the actual times found in this study. Conner-Spady et al…”

Section: Fig 1 Findings From the Hospital List With Average Age Andcontrasting

confidence: 65%

“…[6] One study found that 84% of waiting patients felt that it was fair if another patient was placed ahead of them if they had worse pain or greater limitation of daily functions. [4] However, Tebé et al [7] reported on primary knee arthroplasty waiting lists and concluded that the priority system had no effect on implementing prioritisation for patients based on their severity.…”

Section: Fig 1 Findings From the Hospital List With Average Age Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[7] An open-ended amount of time may leave the patient feeling hopeless. [4] Therefore, if some idea of how long they will have to wait is provided, the probability of the patient remaining on the list will be increased. The deficiencies identified in this study prompted our unit to introduce a scoring-based prioritisation system incorporating clinical, radiographic and societal parameters in an effort to improve fair and appropriate access to high-cost care.…”

Section: Fig 1 Findings From the Hospital List With Average Age Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hip and knee arthroplasty waiting list – how accurate and fair?

Kavalieratos¹,

Nortje²,

Dunn³

2017

S Afr Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Resource-intensive procedures require the use of patient waiting lists in an attempt to increase fairness of access to surgery and improve surgical efficiency. Total hip and knee arthroplasty has waiting lists in excess of years. Objectives. To analyse our tertiary state institution's hip and knee arthroplasty waiting list to assess its accuracy. Methods. At Groote Schuur Hospital, our hospital-maintained database was compared with the surgeons' personally maintained database. Patients were then telephoned to confirm their contactability, and to discover whether they still wanted the procedure, or if they had already had it. Waiting duration and patient demographics were then calculated. Results. Of the 655 patients on the hospital waiting list, only 454 were contactable. Three hundred and nine patients still wanted the surgery, 93 had already undergone surgery and 52 no longer wanted surgery. The last group was the oldest and had had the longest waiting time. Those still waiting had waited 451 days (minimum -maximum (standard deviation), 90 -1 593 (228.5)), those that had had surgery 371 days (0 -1 728 (296)) and those no longer interested 523 days (138 -1 881 (260.9)). A total of 429 patients were present on the surgeons' list but not on the hospital list. They had had longer waiting times than those on the hospital list. Conclusion. The arthroplasty waiting list is inaccurate due to the existence of two concurrent lists and poor data management, particularly of current contact details. The unfairness of a wide range of waiting times was identified, with patients only on the surgeons' personal database disadvantaged. These deficiencies have prompted the introduction of a scoring-based prioritisation system incorporating clinical, radiographic and societal parameters, in an effort to improve fair and appropriate access to this high-cost care.

show abstract

‘There are too many of us to fix.’ Patients’ views of acceptable waiting times for hip and knee replacement

Abstract: Patients' views of acceptable waiting times are important for a fair process of establishing waiting time benchmarks for joint replacement.

Cited by 14 publications

References 18 publications

Patient experiences during waiting time for dental treatment

Patient experiences during waiting time for dental treatment

Expectations Confounded: Patients Are Satisfied with THR and TKR Delivery in Australian Public Hospitals—A Multisite Case Study

Hip and knee arthroplasty waiting list – how accurate and fair?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About