Search

The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare quality in the emergency department, including directly impacting quality metrics and worsening barriers to the quality improvement process such as burnout, staff turnover, and boarding. We aimed to develop a blueprint for postpandemic quality improvement to address these specific barriers, focused on prioritizing frontline staff engagement from idea generation to implementation and assessment. Drawing from teamwork literature, we constructed a process that emphasized egalitarian conversations, psychological safety, and creating an environment where staff could feel heard at every step of the process. We applied this blueprint to improving rates of patients who leave without being seen and achieved a four percentage point reduction (9% vs. 5%, p

Background and Objectives: Hospitals and clinicians increasingly are reimbursed based on quality of care through financial incentives tied to value-based purchasing. Patient-centered care, measured through patient experience surveys, is a key component of many quality incentive programs. We hypothesize that operational aspects such as wait times are an important element of emergency department (ED) patient experience. The objectives of this paper are to determine (1) the association between ED wait times and patient experience and (2) whether patient comments show awareness of wait times. Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020, across 16 EDs within a regional health care system. Patient and operations data were obtained as secondary data through internal sources and merged with primary patient experience data from our data analytics team. Dependent variables are (1) the association between ED wait times in minutes and patient experience ratings and (2) the association between wait times in minutes and patient comments including the term wait (yes/no). Patients rated their “likelihood to recommend (LTR) an ED” on a 0 to 10 scale (categories: “Promoter” = 9-10, “Neutral” = 7-8, or “Detractor” = 0-6). Our aggregate experience rating, or Net Promoter Score (NPS), is calculated by the following formula for each distinct wait time (rounded to the nearest minute): NPS = 100* (# promoters – # detractors)/(# promoters + # neutrals + # detractors). Independent variables for patient age and gender and triage acuity, were included as potential confounders. We performed a mixed-effect multivariate ordinal logistic regression for the rating category as a function of 30 minutes waited. We also performed a logistic regression for the percentage of patients commenting on the wait as a function of 30 minutes waited. Standard errors are adjusted for clustering between the 16 ED sites. Results: A total of 50 833 unique participants completed an experience survey, representing a response rate of 8.1%. Of these respondents, 28.1% included comments, with 10.9% using the term “wait.” The odds ratio for association of a 30-minute wait with LTR category is 0.83 [0.81, 0.84]. As wait times increase, the odds of commenting on the wait increase by 1.49 [1.46, 1.53]. We show policy-relevant bubble plot visualizations of these two relationships. Conclusions: Patients were less likely to give a positive patient experience rating as wait times increased, and this was reflected in their comments. Improving on the factors contributing to ED wait times is essential to meeting health care systems’ quality initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate potential differences in new patient appointment wait times for otolaryngology care based on insurance types and explore factors influencing these wait times. Study Design: A cross‐sectional audit study, using a "mystery caller" approach, analyzed with a linear mixed Poisson model to adjust for confounding factors. Setting: A total of 612 physicians across 49 states and the District of Columbia, representing 6 otolaryngology subspecialties, were included. Methods: Otolaryngology physicians were contacted by mystery callers via telephone with scripted clinical vignettes as patients with either Medicaid or Blue Cross/Blue Shield (BCBS) insurance. Callers requested next available appointment. Wait times for new patient appointments were recorded and analyzed in R using a generalized linear mixed Poisson model. Results: A total of 1183 of 1224 calls reached a representative. Medicaid patients waited 5.73% longer (P <.001) compared to BCBS patients (IRR: 1.06; confidence interval [CI]: 1.03‐1.09; P <.001), with respective mean wait times of 36.8 days (SE ± 1.6) and 32.4 days (SE ± 1.6). Longer waiting times were also associated with physicians affiliated with universities (P =.001) and certain subspecialties, such as pediatric otolaryngology (P <.001) and neurotology (P =.008). Regional differences were also observed, with specific AAO‐HNS regions showing shorter wait times. The model achieved a conditional R‐squared value of 0.947. Conclusion: This study reveals disparities in wait times for otolaryngology care based on insurance type, with extended wait times for Medicaid beneficiaries. The findings highlight a potential access to care disparity, which begets the need for strategies that ensure equitable access to otolaryngology care and further research to understand the underlying reasons for these potential disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children with otitis media who are referred to paediatric otorhinolaryngology (ORL) departments often experience significant delays in treatment. Alternate models of care utilising audiologists with extended scopes of practice can potentially improve outcomes in services experiencing difficulties with high demand and insufficient ORL capacity. An Advanced Audiology Practitioner (AAP) service was implemented in Counties Manukau to combat known long wait times for children with otitis media. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the clinical and service outcomes of the 165 children referred to the AAP service during the initial 3 month period of operation. Engagement with the AAP service was high, with a 96% attendance rate at the first appointment. The proportion of children waiting longer than recommended (>120 days) for paediatric ORL appointments was reduced by 33%, and the average wait time for children seen in the AAP service was reduced from 196 to 14 days. The AAP model provided an efficient and effective clinical service, with 55% of children seen in a single visit and 91% of waitlisted children having middle ear effusion on myringotomy. In conclusion, the AAP model improves access to ORL treatment, particularly for children at risk for otitis media and associated hearing loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Individuals dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid (duals) may face greater obstacles to access to disease-modifying Alzheimer's treatments in spite of their higher disease burden, because of clinicians' reluctance to accept Medicaid and the so-called "lesser of" policy, under which Medicaid may pay providers lower rates. Objective: To project differential wait times for duals compared to Medicare-only beneficiaries by state. Methods: We used State Medicaid payment policy and Medicare enrollment data and a Markov model to predict differential wait times for duals and non-duals from 2023 to 2050. We estimated available diagnostic appointments by state for both groups based on reluctance of clinicians to accept Medicaid and the "lesser of" policy for each year. Results: We estimate overall average wait times of almost two years (22.9 months) but almost three times as long for duals (59.8 months) than non-duals (20.7 months) because of higher disease burden. The effects of Medicaid payment policy would increase average wait times for duals to 89 months with 20 states having wait times of 99 months or more, which would effectively deprive duals of access. Conclusions: The added average wait times in many states would effectively deprive duals from access to treatment and translate into avoidable disease progression and mortality. Policy interventions to reduce financial and nonfinancial obstacles are dearly needed to avoid deepening disparities. Examples are coverage arrangements that integrate Medicare and Medicaid coverage, covering the co-payment for physician services in full, and stricter network adequacy requirements for Medicaid Managed Care plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The COVID‐19 pandemic led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare quality in the emergency department, including directly impacting quality metrics and worsening barriers to the quality improvement process such as burnout, staff turnover, and boarding. We aimed to develop a blueprint for postpandemic quality improvement to address these specific barriers, focused on prioritizing frontline staff engagement from idea generation to implementation and assessment. Drawing from teamwork literature, we constructed a process that emphasized egalitarian conversations, psychological safety, and creating an environment where staff could feel heard at every step of the process. We applied this blueprint to improving rates of patients who leave without being seen and achieved a four percentage point reduction (9% vs. 5%, p

This study aims to investigate patients' knowledge of the triage system, utilization of primary healthcare resources, and expectations for waiting times in Jordanian Emergency Departments (EDs). A descriptive, cross-sectional design was employed in the EDs in the largest public hospitals in Jordan. Convenient sampling resulted in 726 participants. A self-reported questionnaire included socio-demographic information and instruments assessing primary healthcare use, triage system awareness, and expected waiting times. Most participants (61.3%) lacked awareness of the triage system. The use of primary healthcare was influenced by age, education, marital status, current job, nationality, and location. Having a primary healthcare provider was associated with higher patient satisfaction. Significant variations in expected waiting times for diagnostic test results were noted based on gender, place of residence, education, current job, and marital status. Addressing patient awareness of the triage system is crucial for optimizing healthcare accessibility and quality in Jordanian EDs. Improving patient education, communication, and primary care utilization can enhance patient outcomes, reduce ED burden, and contribute to a more efficient healthcare system.

Abstract Background Despite the increasing prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD), data regarding access to child development services have remained limited globally. Long wait times are a major barrier to developmental assessments, impacting on care and outcomes. The aim is to retrospectively analyse the demographic profile and prioritisation of patients seen at a child developmental assessment service (CDAS) in a vulnerable region of Sydney, and explore factors affecting wait times. Methods Data was collated and analysed for 2354 patients from 2018 to 2022. Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) were collated from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Descriptive statistics were used for demographic data and various statistical methods were used to analyse the relationships and impact of factors likely to affect wait lists. Results The median age was 51 months (IQR41-61) and males comprised 73.7% of the cohort. 64% of children were from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds (CALD) and 47% lived in the most disadvantaged suburbs. The median wait time was 302.5 days (IQR175-379) and 70% of children were seen within 12 months. CALD patients and children over 5-years had shorter wait times. Most children with Global Developmental Delay (GDD) were from the lowest four SEIFA deciles and waited longer for an appointment. 42.6% were seen within the priority allocated time or sooner. Children with ASD and/or severe GDD were prioritised to be seen earlier. Overall, the study could not demonstrate any difference in the wait times according to the prioritisation groups. Conclusion This study provides insights into the profile, prioritisation processes and wait lists of children seen by CDAS in South Western Sydney with high rates of social vulnerability and presents an argument to discuss benchmarking targets with service providers. It identifies the need to prioritise children living in suburbs with socioeconomic disadvantage and refine prioritisation and data collection processes to improve wait times.

Background Wait times at Canadian multidisciplinary pain clinics have been reported as excessive for nearly 2 decades.Aims The aim of this study was to gain insight into the patient experience of waiting for chronic pain specialty care.Methods A cross-sectional survey of new patients waiting for an appointment was conducted in six multidisciplinary pain clinics, including one pediatric clinic, in Ontario, Quebec, and Manitoba between February 2020 and October 2022. Participants were asked about the length of time they waited for their appointment since being referred, their quality of life, health care professionals seen while waiting, and an open-ended question, “Is there anything else you’d like to tell us?”Results Among the 493 adult and 100 pediatric respondents, 53% of adults and 82% of children reported wait times under 6 months, whereas 22% of adults and 4% of children waited longer than a year. Between 52% and 63% of adults and 29% to 48% of children reported being affected by chronic pain “quite a bit” or “extremely” on measures of quality of life. The most visited health care professionals while waiting for a pain clinic appointment were family doctors/nurse practitioners for adults and physiotherapists for children. Qualitative analysis of open-ended question responses revealed eight themes: system navigation issues, administrative issues, decreased quality of life, distress, self-advocacy, coping strategies, communication, and distrust.Conclusions Our findings provide real-time regional snapshots into the impact of long wait times experienced by Canadians living with chronic pain. There is an urgent need to better support patients during the waiting period. Expanding technologies such as electronic consultation hold great promise.

Background: Despite the increasing prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD), data regarding access to child development services have remained limited globally. Long wait times are a major barrier to developmental assessments, impacting on care and outcomes. The aim is to retrospectively analyse the demographic profile and prioritisation of patients seen at a child developmental assessment service (CDAS) in a vulnerable region of Sydney, and explore factors affecting wait times. Methods: Data was collated and analysed for 2354 patients from 2018 to 2022. Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) were collated from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Descriptive statistics were used for demographic data and various statistical methods were used to analyse the relationships and impact of factors likely to affect wait lists. Results: The median age was 51 months (IQR41-61) and males comprised 73.7% of the cohort. 64% of children were from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds (CALD) and 47% lived in the most disadvantaged suburbs. The median wait time was 302.5 days (IQR175-379) and 70% of children were seen within 12 months. CALD patients and children over 5-years had shorter wait times. Most children with Global Developmental Delay (GDD) were from the lowest four SEIFA deciles and waited longer for an appointment. 42.6% were seen within the priority allocated time or sooner. Children with ASD and/or severe GDD were prioritised to be seen earlier. Overall, the study could not demonstrate any difference in the wait times according to the prioritisation groups. Conclusion: This study provides insights into the profile, prioritisation processes and wait lists of children seen by CDAS in South Western Sydney with high rates of social vulnerability and presents an argument to discuss benchmarking targets with service providers. It identifies the need to prioritise children living in suburbs with socioeconomic disadvantage and refine prioritisation and data collection processes to improve wait times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Long clinic wait times can contribute to treatment delays and decreased patient satisfaction. Veterans are often waiting in the urology clinic for a prolonged period that delays treatments including possible surgical interventions leading to patient dissatisfaction. Purpose: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to decrease the overall procedural wait times in an outpatient urology clinic by implementing a Fast-Track procedural clinic. Methods: The Fast-Track procedural clinic was developed to expedite care for veterans actively under bladder or prostate cancer surveillance, employing lean methodology principles. We also utilized the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Outpatient and Ambulatory Surgery Survey (OAS CAHPS) tool to assess patient satisfaction with the newly implemented Fast-Track clinic. Wait times were collected and analyzed by SPSS statistical software to determine the effectiveness of a Fast-Track clinic. Results: The Fast-Track clinic was implemented to veterans presenting to the urology clinic for procedural appointments from June 2021 to December 2021. The usage of a Fast-Track clinic decreased the overall wait times from 131 to 75 minutes within 8 weeks (43% improvement). The OAS CAHPS tool found that 55% of veterans received easy-to-understand instructions pre-Fast-Track implementation, compared with 59% post-Fast-Track implementation (a 4% improvement). Furthermore, 82% of veterans reported that they did not receive written discharge instructions post-Fast-Track implementation compared with 32% pre-Fast-Track implementation. Conclusion: Incorporating a Fast-Track procedural clinic helped minimize wait times, leading to a reduction in procedural wait times and urologic surgical delays. Implications for Nursing: The implications for practice include future studies focusing on other strategies for improving clinic wait times including block schedules and qualitative measures in the urologic and other specialty areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Free clinics may present long wait times. A retrospective chart review was conducted at a free clinic to understand contributing factors. Three wait times (total visit time, lobby wait time, and triage time) were analyzed across 349 patients. Variables included in the models were the total number of patients, providers, and volunteers; interpreter services; social work involvement; medical complexity; new vs. returning patient; scheduled vs. walk-in appointment; transportation provision; medical volunteer training level; and on-site medications and labs. Data analysis with multiple regressions was conducted. Factors that significantly affected wait times included the level of medical complexity (p<.001), medical volunteer training levels (p<.001), in-house labs (p<.001), in-house medications (p=.04), and new patients (p=.01). An intervention involving time benchmarks at the beginning of clinics reduced first-wave lobby wait times (p<.001). Future interventions addressing these factors may reduce wait times at other clinics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Wait times at Canadian multidisciplinary pain clinics have been reported as excessive for nearly 2 decades. Aims: The aim of this study was to gain insight into the patient experience of waiting for chronic pain specialty care. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of new patients waiting for an appointment was conducted in six multidisciplinary pain clinics, including one pediatric clinic, in Ontario, Quebec, and Manitoba between February 2020 and October 2022. Participants were asked about the length of time they waited for their appointment since being referred, their quality of life, health care professionals seen while waiting, and an open-ended question, "Is there anything else you'd like to tell us?" Results: Among the 493 adult and 100 pediatric respondents, 53% of adults and 82% of children reported wait times under 6 months, whereas 22% of adults and 4% of children waited longer than a year. Between 52% and 63% of adults and 29% to 48% of children reported being affected by chronic pain "quite a bit" or "extremely" on measures of quality of life. The most visited health care professionals while waiting for a pain clinic appointment were family doctors/nurse practitioners for adults and physiotherapists for children. Qualitative analysis of open-ended question responses revealed eight themes: system navigation issues, administrative issues, decreased quality of life, distress, self-advocacy, coping strategies, communication, and distrust. Conclusions: Our findings provide real-time regional snapshots into the impact of long wait times experienced by Canadians living with chronic pain. There is an urgent need to better support patients during the waiting period. Expanding technologies such as electronic consultation hold great promise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measuring the supply and demand for access to and wait-times for healthcare is key to managing healthcare services and allocating resources appropriately. Yet, few jurisdictions in distributed, socialized medicine settings have any way to do so. In this paper, we propose the requirements for a jurisdictional patient scheduling system that can measure key metrics, such as supply of and demand for regulated health care professional care, access to and wait times for care, real-time health system utilization and provide the data to compute patient journeys. The system is also capable of tracking new supply of providers and who does not have access to a primary care provider. Benefits, limitations and risks of the model are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy / Journal Canadien de la Pharmacie Hospitalière is the property of Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To determine variables associated with longer wait times and decreased patient satisfaction. To determine the association of trainees with clinic wait times and patient satisfaction scores in an academic center. Study Design: Cross‐sectional study. Methods: We recruited 266 study participants from an interdisciplinary Head and Neck Cancer outpatient clinic setting. Trained observers recorded observations related to wait times, time with individual health care practitioners, and total time spent in clinic. An 11‐question survey was given to patients at the end of their visit assessing each patient's satisfaction with their visit, subjective wait time, and their likelihood to recommend the health care provider. Results: Increased objective wait times were associated with new patients (p = 0.006) and based on the physician they saw (p < 0.001). Patients who saw a trainee spent less time waiting to see a physician (p = 0.023), more total time with a physician (p = 0.001), and reported higher wait time satisfaction scores (p = 0.001). There was no difference in total visit time if patients saw a trainee (p = 0.42). Patient satisfaction with wait time was correlated with all other aspects of patient satisfaction (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, the subjective wait time was associated with the likelihood to recommend (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Prolonged objective wait times in a multidisciplinary oncology outpatient setting were associated with several factors including specific physicians and new patient status. Trainee interaction with patients led to shorter wait times and improved patient satisfaction scores with wait times. Satisfaction with wait time was positively correlated with all aspects of patient satisfaction and 'likelihood to recommend' scores. Level of Evidence: NA Laryngoscope, 134:178–184, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients often have limited understanding of the emergency department (ED) care process, which can increase anxiety, frustration, and confusion. This study implemented and assessed the usefulness of a poster explaining the ED care process. A large wall-mounted poster illustrating the patient journey was developed; two different data collection techniques were used. First, a QR code/URL was used to passively collect patient reactions to the poster in 15 EDs. Due to limited response, a paper survey was developed and delivered by research assistants in three study sites using a consecutive sampling method. A total of 67 responses were collected from the QR/URL method between October 2017 and July 2021. The in-person survey collected 316 responses, of which approximately half of the respondents were women and the majority identified as white. Half of the respondents presented to the ED alone. Nearly 40% of respondents had noticed and engaged with the poster without prompting. Once prompted, the majority of respondents understood its content and over half found the information to be extremely or very helpful in preparing them for their ED journey. Respondents identified three additional key information needs: 1) real-time waiting times, 2) triaging scoring information, and 3) support on what to do while waiting. Patient journey posters may assist patients in navigating the ED care process. Exploring alternative delivery methods, personalizing materials and addressing wait times may increase usefulness. Reconceptualizing the waiting room as an opportunity for patient education and communication may alleviate patient fears and better prepare them for the ED journey.

Abstract Background While the number of medical images has increased substantially, the demand has outpaced access, resulting in long wait times in many countries. Long wait times are a key problem for patient safety and quality of care as they can result in prolonged suffering, delayed diagnosis and treatment, as well as poorer prognosis and loss of lives. Surprisingly, little is known about wait times for imaging services. Objective Investigate wait times for specific imaging services in Norway and to compare wait times with the total number of examinations and their development over time. Methods Data from the wait time registry at the Norwegian Directorate of Health from 2018 to 2021 as well as data on outpatient imaging provided by the Norwegian Health Economics Administration (HELFO) and in-patient data afforded by fourteen hospital trusts and hospitals in Norway were analysed. Data include the total number of imaging examinations according to the Norwegian Classification of Radiological Procedures (NCRP). Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics. Results Wait times vary through the months of the year. Conventional X-ray (XR) had the shortest wait times (3.0-4.4 weeks), and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) had the lengthiest (8.7–12.0 and 7.9–11.4 weeks respectively). The wait times were lengthiest during the summer and winter holidays. Variations in wait times were also found for specific examination types between Norway’s four public health regions. In addition, there was variation over time within the health regions. The wait times with the private health providers were substantially lower than with the public health providers. From 2018 to 2021, the wait time for MRIs increased by 6.6%, while the number of examinations (per 10,000) increased by 8.6%. Those regions with the highest number of examinations per 1,000 inhabitants per year had the lowest wait times. Conclusion Wait times for diagnostic imaging procedures varied with time, region, and modality in Norway from 2018 to 2021. Long wait times may entail many negative consequences for patients, professionals, and the healthcare system. Reducing long wait times is an obvious way to improve the quality, safety, and efficiency of care.

BackgroundEarly detection of melanoma is critical for positive outcomes. However, access for the diagnosis of melanoma remains problematic for segments of the general population.ObjectiveTo compare the rates of dermatology and family medicine practitioner acceptances for a public insurance (Medicaid) versus private insurance (Anthem Blue Cross) and clinic wait times for an appointment for a changing pigmented skin lesion concerning melanoma in rural and urban regions in California.MethodsCross-sectional audit study between June 2017 and March 2019; scripted phone calls were made to dermatology and family medicine practices (FMPs).ResultsFamily medicine and dermatology practices in both regions had significantly decreased acceptance of Medicaid. Dermatology practices had 11.3% to 13.0% Medicaid acceptance rates that were less than FMP rates of 28% to 36%. In both regions, FMP wait times were 2.4- to 3.2-fold longer for public versus private insurance; there were little differences in wait times for the 2 insurance types in dermatology practices, in both regions.LimitationsAssessment of only 2 regions in the state of California.ConclusionDelays at FMPs and insurance types limit access to melanoma screening in California for underserved segments of the general population, which has implications for melanoma outcomes and health policy.

Background: While the number of medical images has increased substantially, the demand has outpaced access, resulting in long wait times in many countries. Long wait times are a key problem for patient safety and quality of care as they can result in prolonged suffering, delayed diagnosis and treatment, as well as poorer prognosis and loss of lives. Surprisingly, little is known about wait times for imaging services. Objective: Investigate wait times for specific imaging services in Norway and to compare wait times with the total number of examinations and their development over time. Methods: Data from the wait time registry at the Norwegian Directorate of Health from 2018 to 2021 as well as data on outpatient imaging provided by the Norwegian Health Economics Administration (HELFO) and in-patient data afforded by fourteen hospital trusts and hospitals in Norway were analysed. Data include the total number of imaging examinations according to the Norwegian Classification of Radiological Procedures (NCRP). Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics. Results: Wait times vary through the months of the year. Conventional X-ray (XR) had the shortest wait times (3.0-4.4 weeks), and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) had the lengthiest (8.7–12.0 and 7.9–11.4 weeks respectively). The wait times were lengthiest during the summer and winter holidays. Variations in wait times were also found for specific examination types between Norway's four public health regions. In addition, there was variation over time within the health regions. The wait times with the private health providers were substantially lower than with the public health providers. From 2018 to 2021, the wait time for MRIs increased by 6.6%, while the number of examinations (per 10,000) increased by 8.6%. Those regions with the highest number of examinations per 1,000 inhabitants per year had the lowest wait times. Conclusion: Wait times for diagnostic imaging procedures varied with time, region, and modality in Norway from 2018 to 2021. Long wait times may entail many negative consequences for patients, professionals, and the healthcare system. Reducing long wait times is an obvious way to improve the quality, safety, and efficiency of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In-office needle arthroscopy (IONA) has been described as a diagnostic alternative to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for intra-articular pathology. However, few studies have analyzed its impact on cost and wait times when used as a therapeutic intervention. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact on cost and wait times associated with offering IONA for partial medial meniscectomy as an alternative to traditional operating room (OR) arthroscopy for patients with irreparable medial meniscus tears on MRI. Methods Two models were created comparing the existing care pathway (current state) to a proposed future state utilizing IONA. Data sources were accounting data from an academically affiliated hospital in Canada and supplemented with literature values. A Monte Carlo simulation combined with DuPont analysis running 10,000 simulations was conducted to calculate the revenue, expenses, profits, and effect on surgical waitlists (i.e., throughput) between the states. Sensitivity analyses examined the influence of patient preference and revision rates on profit and throughput. Two-sample Student’s t test was performed (p

Background: Section 507 of the VA MISSION Act of 2018 mandated a 2-year pilot study of medical scribes in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), with 12 VA Medical Centers randomly selected to receive scribes in their emergency departments or high wait time specialty clinics (cardiology and orthopedics). The pilot began on June 30, 2020, and ended on July 1, 2022. Objective: Our objective was to evaluate the impact of medical scribes on provider productivity, wait times, and patient satisfaction in cardiology and orthopedics, as mandated by the MISSION Act. Design: Cluster randomized trial, with intent-to-treat analysis using difference-in-differences regression. Patients: Veterans using 18 included VA Medical Centers (12 intervention and 6 comparison sites). Intervention: Randomization into MISSION 507 medical scribe pilot. Main Measures: Provider productivity, wait times, and patient satisfaction per clinic-pay period. Key Results: Randomization into the scribe pilot was associated with increases of 25.2 relative value units (RVUs) per full-time equivalent (FTE) (p < 0.001) and 8.5 visits per FTE (p = 0.002) in cardiology and increases of 17.3 RVUs per FTE (p = 0.001) and 12.5 visits per FTE (p = 0.001) in orthopedics. We found that the scribe pilot was associated with a decrease of 8.5 days in request to appointment day wait times (p < 0.001) in orthopedics, driven by a 5.7-day decrease in appointment made to appointment day wait times (p < 0.001), and observed no change in wait times in cardiology. We also observed no declines in patient satisfaction with randomization into the scribe pilot. Conclusions: Given the potential improvements in productivity and wait times with no change in patient satisfaction, our results suggest that scribes may be a useful tool to improve access to VHA care. However, participation in the pilot by sites and providers was voluntary, which could have implications for scalability and what effects could be expected if scribes were introduced to the care process without buy-in. Cost was not considered in this analysis but is an important factor for future implementation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04154462. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding how operational strategies impact critical performance metrics is critical to the clinic's ability to provide a value-based service to patients. This study investigated the utility of electronic medical record (EMR) audit file data in assessing operational strategies. EMR data were used to assess patient appointment lengths and conclude that shorter scheduled patient visit lengths, which resulted from one operational strategy (physician choice of visit lengths), had a negative impact on a second operational strategy (minimizing patient wait times). Patients with 15-minute appointments had a higher total mean wait time and shorter provider care or contact time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to breast cancer diagnostic regional wait times exceeding both national and provincial standards and to symptomatic patient referrals for diagnostic mammography taking longer than abnormal screening mammography referrals, the Rae Fawcett Breast Health Clinic (RFBHC) was opened in 2017 in a mid-sized Canadian hospital serving both urban and rural-remote communities. We investigated whether the RFBHC improved wait times to breast cancer diagnosis, improved compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards, and decreased the wait time disparity associated with referral source. Statistical analyses of wait time differences were conducted between patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer prior to and after the RFBHC establishment. Study group compliance with national and provincial standards and wait time differences by referral source were also analysed. A survey was administered to assess overall patient experience with the RFBHC and clinic wait times. RFBHC patients had a shorter mean wait to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 45.7 days, p ≤ 0.001) and a shorter mean wait to initial breast cancer treatment (49.1 vs. 78.9 days, p ≤ 0.001) than pre-RFBHC patients. After the RFBHC establishment, patients who attended the RFBHC had a shorter mean wait time to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 36.9 days, p = 0.005) and to initial treatment (49.1 vs. 73.1 days, p ≤ 0.001) than patients who did not attend the clinic. Compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards improved after the RFBHC establishment and the wait time disparity between screening mammography referrals and symptomatic patient referrals decreased. Survey results indicate that the RFBHC is meeting patient expectations. We concluded that the establishment of a breast health clinic in a Canadian center serving urban and rural-remote communities improved breast diagnostic services.

Background: In-office needle arthroscopy (IONA) has been described as a diagnostic alternative to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for intra-articular pathology. However, few studies have analyzed its impact on cost and wait times when used as a therapeutic intervention. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact on cost and wait times associated with offering IONA for partial medial meniscectomy as an alternative to traditional operating room (OR) arthroscopy for patients with irreparable medial meniscus tears on MRI. Methods: Two models were created comparing the existing care pathway (current state) to a proposed future state utilizing IONA. Data sources were accounting data from an academically affiliated hospital in Canada and supplemented with literature values. A Monte Carlo simulation combined with DuPont analysis running 10,000 simulations was conducted to calculate the revenue, expenses, profits, and effect on surgical waitlists (i.e., throughput) between the states. Sensitivity analyses examined the influence of patient preference and revision rates on profit and throughput. Two-sample Student's t test was performed (p <.05). Results: An average of 198 (standard deviation (SD) 31) patients underwent arthroscopic meniscectomy or repair each year from 2016 to 2020. The IONA revision rate was calculated as 20.3%. Compared to the current state, annual expenses in the IONA pathway were significantly reduced ($266,912.68 versus $281,415.23, p <.0001), while improving throughput by 21.2% (3.54%). Sensitivity analysis revealed 10% of patients need to select IONA over traditional OR arthroscopy with the revision rate remaining below 40% for the proposed state profit to be higher than the current state. Conclusions: IONA is a cost-effective alternative to traditional OR arthroscopy in patients undergoing partial medial meniscectomy. The next steps are to assess patients' perceptions of IONA as an alternative to traditional OR arthroscopy, and to carry out clinical trials to determine the efficacy, patient-reported outcome metrics, and complications of IONA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objectives As one of the world's only fully publicly administered, universal healthcare systems, Canada intends to provide equitable access to services for all patients. Socioeconomic status (SES) can affect treatment wait times with implications on health outcomes; however, this has not been evaluated in the setting of laryngeal disease, which incorporates urgent and elective conditions, in a universal healthcare system. This study aims to identify whether SES‐affected treatment wait times for laryngeal therapies in this system. Methods A retrospective review was conducted on a cohort of patients with laryngeal disease at an academic, tertiary center who underwent laryngeal surgery over a three‐year period. Data retrieved through medical records; surgical and voice therapy wait times were normalized to each practitioner's average wait time for respective diagnostic categories. Income was used to assess SES and was derived from Statistics Canada census information based on patient postal codes. Results Data analysis identified 578 patients (59% male). Mean wait time to surgery for all conditions was 123.5 (95% confidence interval 113.1–133.9) days. Analysis of variance analysis found no difference in wait times between different SES groups (p = .28), regardless of laryngeal disease category. Patients with cancer or airway obstruction had shorter wait times compared with benign conditions (p

Background: We have recently reported a 35% drop in new lung cancer diagnoses and a 64% drop in lung cancer surgeries during the first year of the pandemic. Methods: The target population was divided into three cohorts: pre-COVID-19 (2019), first year of COVID-19 (2020), and second year of COVID-19 (2021). Results: The number of new lung cancer diagnoses during the second year of the pandemic increased by 75%, with more than 50% being in the advanced/metastatic stage. There was a significant increase in cases with multiple extrathoracic sites of metastases during the pandemic. During the first year of the pandemic, significantly more patients were treated with radiosurgery compared to the pre-COVID-19 year. During the second year, the number of radiosurgery and surgical cases returned to pre-COVID-19 levels. No significant changes were observed in systemic chemotherapy and targeted therapy. No statistical difference was identified in the mean wait time for diagnosis and treatment during the three years of observation. However, the wait time for surgery was prolonged compared to the pre-COVID-19 cohort. Conclusions: The significant drop in new diagnoses of lung cancer during the first year of the pandemic was followed by an almost two-fold increase in the second year, with the increased rate of metastatic disease with multiple extra-thoracic site metastases. Limited access to surgery resulted in the more frequent use of radiosurgery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of race and ethnicity with wait times for children in US emergency departments (ED). METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of ED encounters of children (<18 years) from 2014 to 2019 using a multistage survey of nonfederal US ED encounters. Our primary variable of interest was composite race and ethnicity: non-Hispanic White (NHW), non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, and all others. Our outcome was ED wait time in minutes. We evaluated the association between race and ethnicity and wait time in Weibull regression models that sequentially added variables of acuity, demographics, hospital factors, and region/urbanicity. RESULTS: We included 163,768,956 survey-weighted encounters. In univariable analysis, Hispanic children had a lower hazard ratio (HR) of progressing to evaluation (HR 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.93) relative to NHW children, indicating longer ED wait times. This association persisted in serial multivariable models incorporating acuity, demographics, and hospital factors. This association was not observed when incorporating variables of hospital region and urbanicity (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-1.00). In subgroup analysis, Hispanic ethnicity was associated with longer wait times in pediatric EDs (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.92), non-metropolitan EDs (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.89), and the Midwest region (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69-0.87). No differences in wait times were observed for children of Black race or other races. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic children experienced longer ED wait times across serial multivariable models, with significant differences limited to pediatric, metropolitan, and Midwest EDs. These results highlight the presence of disparities in access to prompt emergency care for children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reducing patient wait times is a key operational goal and impacts patient outcomes. The purpose of this study is to explore the effects of different radiology scheduling strategies on exam wait times before and after holiday periods at an outpatient imaging facility using computer simulation. An idealized Monte Carlo simulation of exam scheduling at an outpatient imaging facility was developed based on the actual distribution of scheduled exams at outpatient radiology sites at a tertiary care medical center. Using this simulation, we examined three scheduling strategies: (1) no scheduling modifications, (2) increase imaging capacity before or after the holiday (i.e. increase facility hours), and (3) use a novel rolling release scheduling paradigm. In the third scenario, a fraction of exam slots are blocked to long-term follow-up exams and made available only closer to the exam date, thereby preventing long-term follow-up exams from filling the schedule and ensuring slots are available for non-follow-up exams. We examined the effect of these three scenarios on utilization and wait times, which we defined as the time from order placement to exam completion, during and after the holiday period. The baseline mean wait time for non-follow-up exams was 5.4 days in our simulation. When no scheduling modifications were made, there was a significant increase in wait times in the week preceding the holiday when compared to baseline (10.0 days vs 5.4 days, p < 0.01). Wait times remained elevated for 4 weeks following the holiday. Increasing imaging capacity during the holiday and post-holiday period by 20% reduced wait times by only 6.2% (9.38 days vs 10.0 days, p < 0.01). Increasing capacity by 50% resulted in a 7.1% reduction in wait times (9.28 days, p < 0.01), and increasing capacity by 100% resulted in a 13% reduction in wait times (8.75 days, p < 0.01). In comparison, using a rolling release model produced a reduction in peak wait times equivalent to doubling capacity (8.76 days, p < 0.01) when 45% of slots were reserved. Improvements in wait times persisted even when rolling release was limited to the 3 weeks preceding or 1 week following the holiday period. Releasing slots on a rolling basis did not significantly decrease utilization or increase wait times for long-term follow-up exams except in extreme scenarios where 80% or more of slots were reserved for non-follow-up exams. A rolling release scheduling paradigm can significantly reduce wait time fluctuations around holiday periods without requiring additional capacity or impacting utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to breast cancer diagnostic regional wait times exceeding both national and provincial standards and to symptomatic patient referrals for diagnostic mammography taking longer than abnormal screening mammography referrals, the Rae Fawcett Breast Health Clinic (RFBHC) was opened in 2017 in a mid-sized Canadian hospital serving both urban and rural-remote communities. We investigated whether the RFBHC improved wait times to breast cancer diagnosis, improved compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards, and decreased the wait time disparity associated with referral source. Statistical analyses of wait time differences were conducted between patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer prior to and after the RFBHC establishment. Study group compliance with national and provincial standards and wait time differences by referral source were also analysed. A survey was administered to assess overall patient experience with the RFBHC and clinic wait times. RFBHC patients had a shorter mean wait to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 45.7 days, p ≤ 0.001) and a shorter mean wait to initial breast cancer treatment (49.1 vs. 78.9 days, p ≤ 0.001) than pre-RFBHC patients. After the RFBHC establishment, patients who attended the RFBHC had a shorter mean wait time to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 36.9 days, p = 0.005) and to initial treatment (49.1 vs. 73.1 days, p ≤ 0.001) than patients who did not attend the clinic. Compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards improved after the RFBHC establishment and the wait time disparity between screening mammography referrals and symptomatic patient referrals decreased. Survey results indicate that the RFBHC is meeting patient expectations. We concluded that the establishment of a breast health clinic in a Canadian center serving urban and rural-remote communities improved breast diagnostic services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Funding for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) treatment may impact how patients access care, wait times, and costs of care. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare differences in diagnosis and treatment of OSA between Canadian jurisdictions with and without public funding for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Methods: We administered an anonymous internet survey to Canadian adults reporting a physician diagnosis of OSA. Responses were categorized on the basis of whether the respondent's province provided full or partial funding for CPAP therapy for all patients. We assessed wait times for diagnosis and treatment, patient-borne costs, and model of care delivery compared between jurisdictions with and without universal CPAP funding. Results: We received 600 responses representing all Canadian provinces and territories. The median (interquartile range) age was 59 (49-66) years; 57% were male, and 21% were from rural settings. Patients living in provinces without public CPAP funding (n = 419) were more likely to be diagnosed using home sleep apnea testing (69% vs. 20%; P = 0.00019). Wait times were similar after adjustment for demographics, disease characteristics, and model of care. Although patient-borne costs of care were similar between jurisdictions, patients from regions without CPAP funding reported that cost had a greater influence on the choice of therapy. Sleep specialists were more commonly involved in OSA care in regions with CPAP funding. There was no difference in the current use of therapy between jurisdictions with and without public funding. Conclusions: This survey study demonstrates that public funding for CPAP therapy impacts how Canadians access OSA care but is not associated with differences in wait times or costs. Future research is required to determine the impact of different funding models for OSA care on clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, with a five-year survival of 22% in Canada. Guidelines recommend rapid evaluation of patients with suspected lung cancer, but the impact on survival remains unclear. We reviewed medical records of all patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer in four hospital networks across the province of Quebec, Canada, between 1 February and 30 April 2017. Patients were followed for 3 years. Wait times for diagnosis and treatment were collected, and survival analysis using a Cox regression model was conducted. We included 1309 patients, of whom 39% had stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Median wait times were, in general, significantly shorter in patients with stage III–IV NSCLC or SCLC. Surgery was associated with delays compared to other types of treatments. Median survival was 12.9 (11.1–15.7) months. The multivariate survival model included age, female sex, performance status, histology and stage, treatment, and the time interval between diagnosis and treatment. Longer wait times had a slightly protective to neutral effect on survival, but this was not significant in the stage I–II NSCLC subgroup. Wait times for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer were generally within targets. The shorter wait times observed for advanced NSCLC and SCLC might indicate a tendency for clinicians to act quicker on sicker patients. This study did not demonstrate the detrimental effect of longer wait times on survival.

Objectives: As one of the world's only fully publicly administered, universal healthcare systems, Canada intends to provide equitable access to services for all patients. Socioeconomic status (SES) can affect treatment wait times with implications on health outcomes; however, this has not been evaluated in the setting of laryngeal disease, which incorporates urgent and elective conditions, in a universal healthcare system. This study aims to identify whether SES‐affected treatment wait times for laryngeal therapies in this system. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on a cohort of patients with laryngeal disease at an academic, tertiary center who underwent laryngeal surgery over a three‐year period. Data retrieved through medical records; surgical and voice therapy wait times were normalized to each practitioner's average wait time for respective diagnostic categories. Income was used to assess SES and was derived from Statistics Canada census information based on patient postal codes. Results: Data analysis identified 578 patients (59% male). Mean wait time to surgery for all conditions was 123.5 (95% confidence interval 113.1–133.9) days. Analysis of variance analysis found no difference in wait times between different SES groups (p =.28), regardless of laryngeal disease category. Patients with cancer or airway obstruction had shorter wait times compared with benign conditions (p <.0001). Conclusions: SES did not affect treatment wait times for laryngeal therapies in a universal healthcare system. Wait times were shorter for oncologic and obstructive conditions compared with benign conditions, reflecting an ability to accommodate clinical needs without impacting care access at the detriment of different SES statuses. Level of Evidence: 4 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To gather information from stakeholders involved in corneal donation and transplantation to inform discussion at the "National Consensus Forum on Improving Cornea Donation and Transplantation Access in Canada" held in February 2020, survey questions were posed to eye banks, transplanting ophthalmologists and organ donation organizations across Canada to learn more about demand, wait times, and access to tissue for transplant. The survey response rate was one hundred percent (100%) for eye banks and organ donation organizations while 64 percent (64%) of transplant ophthalmologists provided feedback. A number of opportunities for improvement were identified including: demand forecasting; infrastructure and strategies to align supply with demand; data collection and benchmarking of wait times for assessment and transplant to support consistency, equitability and transparency in access; and national collaboration in the development of a data strategy to accurately measure demand and access to cornea transplants in a consistent manner across all provinces to facilitate equity in access nationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A mismatch between patient demand and emergency departments (EDs)' capacity to deliver care often leads to poor patient flow and overcrowding, and therefore an increase in waiting. This paper presents a mid-term decision support system dealing with scheduling and allocation of resources in the ED of the Hospital Center of Troyes, France. An efficient performance evaluation tool based on discrete event simulation (DES) is developed. Through a what-if scenario strategy, 145 scenarios were simulated that allowed us to create a new benchmark that does not exist in the literature. To rank and select the best alternatives, the VIKOR multicriteria analysis method and the entropy method were used. With the objective of minimizing the waiting time and inpatient stay under an additional resource cost constraint, this work has helped to quantify and analyze the impacts related to the structural and organizational reorganization of the ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Total hip and total knee replacement surgery are in high demand, leading to long wait times for many patients. While on the waiting list, patients may experience worsening pain, reduced mobility, and deteriorating health. Given that long wait times are common for lower joint replacement surgery, it is important to understand how patient health changes during the wait period and whether this impacts patient outcomes after surgery. The aim of this scoping review will be to identify and describe the evidence regarding the impact of wait time on patient outcomes for patients who undergo total knee and total hip replacement surgery. Methods This scoping review was designed with guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, and results will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane electronic databases will be searched for English language articles published after 1999. Studies of adult patients with osteoarthritis undergoing primary knee or hip replacement surgery, which measure patient outcomes over the wait period for surgery, will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts followed by full article review. Data will be extracted by two reviewers using a standardized form. Outcomes assessed during the wait period will be identified and described in tables. Factors associated with changes in health status during the wait period will be qualitatively described. Discussion This review will map the evidence regarding wait times for lower extremity joint replacement surgery. Better understanding of how the impact of wait times on patient health status is measured over the perioperative period will inform future research on wait times. Scoping review registration Registered with Open Science Framework, Feb 14, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MV4FS

• Timeliness of care is crucial in lung cancer care. • Survival is not impacted by treatment timing. • Comprehensive evaluation of treatment wait times. • COVID-19 adds complexity to lung cancer care. • Survival analysis, prognostic factors. Lung cancer (LC) remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, necessitating timely diagnosis and treatment to improve patient outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the timeliness of care for LC patients at a public hospital in Almería, Spain, assess adherence to guidelines, and explore associations between timeliness and survival. A retrospective cohort study was conducted, reviewing medical records of LC patients diagnosed between 2019 and 2021. Quality indicators, adapted from prevailing guidelines, facilitated the assessment of care timeliness, with a focus on diagnostic and treatment wait times. Cox regression modeling was employed to explore survival associations, adjusting for covariates including age, performance status, stage, histology, and treatment modalities. Of 539 patients included, most (79.84 %) had initial specialist contact within 7 days, and 82.25 % received diagnosis within 30 days. However, delays were observed in treatment initiation, with surgery experiencing the longest median wait time (78 days). Survival analysis showed no significant difference between shorter and longer diagnostic (HR: 0.87, 95 % CI: 0.62–1.24) or treatment intervals (HR: 1.14, 95 % CI: 0.83–1.58). Multivariate analysis identified age, performance status, stage, histology, and treatment as prognostic factors. This study highlights the importance of timely diagnosis and treatment in improving lung cancer outcomes. Despite achieving diagnostic targets, treatment delays were common, particularly for surgical interventions. These findings underscore the need for enhanced coordination and efficient care pathways to minimize delays, ultimately improving survival rates and quality of life for lung cancer patients. Addressing these issues is crucial for optimizing lung cancer care delivery in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundTo reduce unnecessary ambulatory gastroenterology (GI) visits and increase access to GI care, San Francisco Health Network gastroenterologists and primary care providers implemented guidelines in 2013 that discharged certain patients back to primary care after endoscopy with formal written recommendations. This study assesses the longer-term impact of this policy on GI clinic access, workflow, and provider satisfaction.MethodsAn email-based survey assessed gastroenterologist and primary care provider (PCP) opinions about the discharge process. Administrative data and chart review were used to assess clinic access, intervention fidelity, and re-referral rates.Results102/299 (34%) of PCPs and 5/7 (71%) of gastroenterologists responded to the survey. 74% of PCPs and 100% of gastroenterologists were satisfied or very satisfied with the discharge process. 80% of gastroenterologists believed the discharge process decreased their workload, while 53.5% of primary care providers believed it increased their workload. 6.7% of patients discharged to primary care in 2013 had re-referrals to GI. Wait time for the third-next-available new outpatient GI clinic appointment had previously decreased from 158 days (2012, pre-intervention) to 74 days (2013, post-intervention). In 2015, wait time was 19 days (p

(1) Background: Wait times to chemotherapy are associated with morbidity and mortality in breast cancer patients; however, it is unclear how primary care physician (PCP) continuity impacts these wait times, or whether this association is different in immigrants, who experience cancer care inequities. We assessed the association between PCP continuity and the contact-to-chemotherapy interval (wait time from when a patient first presents to healthcare to the first day of receiving breast cancer chemotherapy), with a specific look at the immigrant population. (2) Methods: Population-based, retrospective cohort study of women who were diagnosed with stage I–III breast cancer in Ontario who received surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. We used quantile regression at the median and 90th percentile to quantify the effect of PCP continuity on the contact-to-chemotherapy interval, performing a separate analysis on the immigrant population. (3) Results: Among 12,781 breast cancer patients, including 1706 immigrants, the median contact-to-chemotherapy interval (126 days) was 3.21 days shorter (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47–5.96) in symptom-detected patients with low PCP continuity, 10.68 days shorter (95% CI 5.36–16.00) in symptom-detected patients with no baseline PCP visits and 17.43 days longer (95% CI 0.90–34.76) in screen-detected immigrants with low PCP continuity compared to the same groups with high PCP continuity. (4) Conclusions: Higher PCP continuity was not associated with a change in the contact-to-chemotherapy interval for most of our study population, but was associated with a marginally longer interval in our symptom-detected population and a shorter contact-to-chemotherapy interval in screen-detected immigrants. This highlights the importance of PCP continuity among immigrants with positive screening results. Additionally, having no PCP visits at baseline was associated with a shorter contact-to-chemotherapy interval in symptom-detected patients.

Objectives: Delays in access to specialty care and elective hip and knee total joint replacement (TJR) surgery remain a major concern among patients with osteoarthritis (OA) in Canada. Centralized intake systems as a wait time management strategy in the face of resource constraints can increase access and patient flow through the system but are not standard practice. We examine how wait time management strategies for the assessment and triaging referrals in a centralized intake system can inform quality improvement initiatives. Design: We developed a discrete-event simulation model using all referrals to the Edmonton Bone and Joint Centre centralized intake system from 2012 to 2016 for the base case model. We assessed the combined effect of three wait time management strategies: improved prioritization, improved sorting through screening, and increased conservative management. Outcomes were measured in terms of patient flow and wait times. Results: The screener sees more patient referrals (7094 compared to 6922), and the number of patients who proceed to surgery is reduced by 282 patients (4%) in the wait time management scenario compared to the base case model. Wait times from referral to surgery are reduced by 54 days for surgical patients. Furthermore, urgent surgical patients experienced lower wait times in all stages of care than non-urgent patients, with wait times from referral to surgery reduced by 86 days. Conclusions: Triaging processes addressing prioritization, screening and conservative management of non-surgical patients can improve patient flow and significantly reduce patient wait times in a centralized intake process for TJR.

Introduction: It is well documented that disparities in patient care based on race and ethnicity are prevalent in the emergency medical care setting. In most cases these evaluations are patient focused and outcome based. The timeliness of patient treatment in the emergency department (ED) is correlated with patient outcomes. In this study, we sought to evaluate whether the timeliness of care for patients with chest pain across stages of care was impacted by patient race.Methods: This was a retrospective evaluation of ED throughput times including adults who presented to one of seventeen EDs in a large healthcare system from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 and met criteria for inclusion. The effect of race on different intervals of care were assessed. Generalized Linear Models were used to estimate the effect of race on different intervals of care while controlling for Charlson Comorbidity index, age, gender, insurance, ED facility type and emergency severity index acuity level.Results: A total of 28,705 patients were included, with a mean age of 54 ± 18 years. The majority of patients were White (63%), female (56%) and had Medicare or Medicaid (56%). Black patients experienced significantly increased wait times for resident physician examination, advanced practice provider examination, attending physician examination, and ED disposition. There was no difference in time to triage between Black patients and White patients.Conclusion: Black patients have longer wait times for resident physician evaluation, advanced practice provider evaluation, attending physician evaluation, and ED disposition when presenting to the ED with chest pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, with a five-year survival of 22% in Canada. Guidelines recommend rapid evaluation of patients with suspected lung cancer, but the impact on survival remains unclear. We reviewed medical records of all patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer in four hospital networks across the province of Quebec, Canada, between 1 February and 30 April 2017. Patients were followed for 3 years. Wait times for diagnosis and treatment were collected, and survival analysis using a Cox regression model was conducted. We included 1309 patients, of whom 39% had stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Median wait times were, in general, significantly shorter in patients with stage III–IV NSCLC or SCLC. Surgery was associated with delays compared to other types of treatments. Median survival was 12.9 (11.1–15.7) months. The multivariate survival model included age, female sex, performance status, histology and stage, treatment, and the time interval between diagnosis and treatment. Longer wait times had a slightly protective to neutral effect on survival, but this was not significant in the stage I–II NSCLC subgroup. Wait times for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer were generally within targets. The shorter wait times observed for advanced NSCLC and SCLC might indicate a tendency for clinicians to act quicker on sicker patients. This study did not demonstrate the detrimental effect of longer wait times on survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Routine preoperative axial imaging studies (CT/MRI) are not recommended for endometrioid endometrial cancer as they are unlikely to change management and may delay surgery. This study evaluated the association of receiving preoperative imaging on various outcomes. A population-based cohort of Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer cases from 2006 to 2016 were identified from the Cancer Registry in Ontario, Canada. Wait time to surgery, type of surgery and overall survival were evaluated in patients with and without preoperative imaging. Predictive factors for wait time > 56 days and aggressive surgery (radical hysterectomy / lymphadenectomy) were determined using multivariable regression analysis. 13,050 cases were included. 22.6% of patients received preoperative imaging, mainly CT scans. Most patients (95.9%) received no neoadjuvant treatment. Patients with preoperative imaging were more likely to have neoadjuvant treatment (11.7% vs. 1.8%) and less likely to have surgery at 180 days post diagnosis (87.9% vs 94.6%). Patients with preoperative imaging had median wait time to surgery of 64 days (47–87), compared to 53 days (36–74) than those without imaging (p < 0.001). Multivariable modeling showed preoperative imaging was associated with decreased odds of having surgery within 56 days (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.62–0.75), and increased odds (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.53–1.95) of having aggressive surgery. The 5-year overall survival for patients with imaging was 84.8% versus 91.1% for patients without preoperative imaging. Preoperative imaging was associated with longer wait times to surgery, more aggressive surgery, surgery with a gynecologic oncologist and increased use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment. In early-stage disease there was no observed improvement in overall survival for patients with preoperative imaging. Further research on potential benefits of preoperative imaging in higher risk patients is required. • 22.6% of all patients received preoperative imaging. • Wait time to surgery was 11 days longer in patients with preoperative imaging. • Patients with preoperative imaging were less likely to have surgery at 56 days and more likely to have aggressive surgery. • In early-stage disease there was no observed improvement in overall survival for patients with preoperative imaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing is critical for monitoring case counts, early detection and containment of infection, clinical management, and surveillance of variants. However, community-based data on the access, uptake, and barriers to testing have been lacking. Methods We conducted serial cross-sectional online surveys covering demographics, coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms, and experiences around SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing to characterize the SARS-CoV-2 testing cascade and associated barriers across 10 US states (California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin), from July 2020 to February 2021. Results In February 2021, across 10 US states, 895 respondents (11%) reported wanting a diagnostic test in the prior 2 weeks, 63% of whom were tested, with limited variability across states. Almost all (97%) who were tested received their results; 56% received their results within 2 days. In Maryland, Florida, and Illinois, where serial data were available at 4 time points, 56% were tested the same day they wanted or needed a test in February 2021, compared with 28% in July 2020, and 45% received results the same day, compared with 17% in July 2020. Wanting a test was significantly more common among younger, nonwhite respondents and participants with a history of symptoms or exposure. Logistical challenges, including not knowing where to go, were the most frequently cited barriers. Conclusions There were significant improvements in access and turnaround times across US states, yet barriers to testing remained consistent across states, underscoring the importance of a continued focus on testing, even amidst mass vaccination campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Diagnostic assessment programs (DAPs) were implemented in Ontario, Canada, to improve the efficiency of the lung cancer care continuum. We compared the efficiency and effectiveness of care provided to patients in DAPs relative to usual care (non-DAPs). METHODS: Lung cancer patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2016 were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Using administrative databases, we identified various health-care encounters 6 months before diagnosis until the start of treatment and compared utilization patterns, timing, and overall survival between DAP and non-DAP patients. RESULTS: DAP patients were younger (P < 0.0001), had fewer comorbidities (P = 0.0006), and were more likely to have early-stage disease (36% vs. 25%) than non-DAP patients. Although DAP patients had a similar time until diagnosis as non-DAP patients, the time until treatment was 8.5 days shorter for DAP patients. DAP patients were more likely to receive diagnostic tests and specialist consultations and less likely to have duplicate chest imaging. DAP patients were more likely to receive brain imaging. Among early-stage lung cancers, brain imaging was high (74% for DAP and 67% for non-DAP), exceeding guideline recommendations. After adjustment for clinical and demographic factors, DAP patients had better overall survival than non-DAP patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.79 [0.76–0.82]), but this benefit was lost after adjusting for emergency presentation (HR: 0.96 [0.92–1.00]). A longer time until treatment was associated with better overall survival. Conclusion: DAPs provided earlier treatment and better access to care, potentially improving survival. Quality improvement opportunities include reducing unnecessary or duplicate testing and characterizing patients who are diagnosed emergently.