Understanding Preprocedure Patient Flow in IR

Abdul Mueed Zafar, Rajeev Suri, Tran Khanh Nguyen, Carson Cope Petrash, Zanira Fazal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose To quantify preprocedural patient flow in interventional radiology (IR) and to identify potential contributors to preprocedural delays. Materials and Methods An administrative dataset was used to compute time intervals required for various preprocedural patient-flow processes. These time intervals were compared across on-time/delayed cases and inpatient/outpatient cases by Mann–Whitney U test. Spearman ρ was used to assess any correlation of the rank of a procedure on a given day and the procedure duration to the preprocedure time. A linear-regression model of preprocedure time was used to further explore potential contributing factors. Any identified reason(s) for delay were collated. P <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Of the total 1,091 cases, 65.8% (n = 718) were delayed. Significantly more outpatient cases started late compared with inpatient cases (81.4% vs 45.0%; P <.001, χ2 test). The multivariate linear regression model showed outpatient status, length of delay in arrival, and longer procedure times to be significantly associated with longer preprocedure times. Late arrival of patients (65.9%), unavailability of physicians (18.4%), and unavailability of procedure room (13.0%) were the three most frequently identified reasons for delay. The delay was multifactorial in 29.6% of cases (n = 213). Conclusions Objective measurement of preprocedural IR patient flow demonstrated considerable waste and highlighted high-yield areas of possible improvement. A data-driven approach may aid efficient delivery of IR care.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1189-1194
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
Volume27
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2016

Fingerprint

Interventional Radiology
Linear Models
Outpatients
Inpatients
Physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Understanding Preprocedure Patient Flow in IR. / Zafar, Abdul Mueed; Suri, Rajeev; Nguyen, Tran Khanh; Petrash, Carson Cope; Fazal, Zanira.

In: Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Vol. 27, No. 8, 01.08.2016, p. 1189-1194.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zafar, Abdul Mueed ; Suri, Rajeev ; Nguyen, Tran Khanh ; Petrash, Carson Cope ; Fazal, Zanira. / Understanding Preprocedure Patient Flow in IR. In: Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. 2016 ; Vol. 27, No. 8. pp. 1189-1194.
@article{172cd68bf3804f05825093673a6552b9,
title = "Understanding Preprocedure Patient Flow in IR",
abstract = "Purpose To quantify preprocedural patient flow in interventional radiology (IR) and to identify potential contributors to preprocedural delays. Materials and Methods An administrative dataset was used to compute time intervals required for various preprocedural patient-flow processes. These time intervals were compared across on-time/delayed cases and inpatient/outpatient cases by Mann–Whitney U test. Spearman ρ was used to assess any correlation of the rank of a procedure on a given day and the procedure duration to the preprocedure time. A linear-regression model of preprocedure time was used to further explore potential contributing factors. Any identified reason(s) for delay were collated. P <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Of the total 1,091 cases, 65.8{\%} (n = 718) were delayed. Significantly more outpatient cases started late compared with inpatient cases (81.4{\%} vs 45.0{\%}; P <.001, χ2 test). The multivariate linear regression model showed outpatient status, length of delay in arrival, and longer procedure times to be significantly associated with longer preprocedure times. Late arrival of patients (65.9{\%}), unavailability of physicians (18.4{\%}), and unavailability of procedure room (13.0{\%}) were the three most frequently identified reasons for delay. The delay was multifactorial in 29.6{\%} of cases (n = 213). Conclusions Objective measurement of preprocedural IR patient flow demonstrated considerable waste and highlighted high-yield areas of possible improvement. A data-driven approach may aid efficient delivery of IR care.",
author = "Zafar, {Abdul Mueed} and Rajeev Suri and Nguyen, {Tran Khanh} and Petrash, {Carson Cope} and Zanira Fazal",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvir.2016.05.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "1189--1194",
journal = "Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology",
issn = "1051-0443",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding Preprocedure Patient Flow in IR

AU - Zafar, Abdul Mueed

AU - Suri, Rajeev

AU - Nguyen, Tran Khanh

AU - Petrash, Carson Cope

AU - Fazal, Zanira

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Purpose To quantify preprocedural patient flow in interventional radiology (IR) and to identify potential contributors to preprocedural delays. Materials and Methods An administrative dataset was used to compute time intervals required for various preprocedural patient-flow processes. These time intervals were compared across on-time/delayed cases and inpatient/outpatient cases by Mann–Whitney U test. Spearman ρ was used to assess any correlation of the rank of a procedure on a given day and the procedure duration to the preprocedure time. A linear-regression model of preprocedure time was used to further explore potential contributing factors. Any identified reason(s) for delay were collated. P <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Of the total 1,091 cases, 65.8% (n = 718) were delayed. Significantly more outpatient cases started late compared with inpatient cases (81.4% vs 45.0%; P <.001, χ2 test). The multivariate linear regression model showed outpatient status, length of delay in arrival, and longer procedure times to be significantly associated with longer preprocedure times. Late arrival of patients (65.9%), unavailability of physicians (18.4%), and unavailability of procedure room (13.0%) were the three most frequently identified reasons for delay. The delay was multifactorial in 29.6% of cases (n = 213). Conclusions Objective measurement of preprocedural IR patient flow demonstrated considerable waste and highlighted high-yield areas of possible improvement. A data-driven approach may aid efficient delivery of IR care.

AB - Purpose To quantify preprocedural patient flow in interventional radiology (IR) and to identify potential contributors to preprocedural delays. Materials and Methods An administrative dataset was used to compute time intervals required for various preprocedural patient-flow processes. These time intervals were compared across on-time/delayed cases and inpatient/outpatient cases by Mann–Whitney U test. Spearman ρ was used to assess any correlation of the rank of a procedure on a given day and the procedure duration to the preprocedure time. A linear-regression model of preprocedure time was used to further explore potential contributing factors. Any identified reason(s) for delay were collated. P <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Of the total 1,091 cases, 65.8% (n = 718) were delayed. Significantly more outpatient cases started late compared with inpatient cases (81.4% vs 45.0%; P <.001, χ2 test). The multivariate linear regression model showed outpatient status, length of delay in arrival, and longer procedure times to be significantly associated with longer preprocedure times. Late arrival of patients (65.9%), unavailability of physicians (18.4%), and unavailability of procedure room (13.0%) were the three most frequently identified reasons for delay. The delay was multifactorial in 29.6% of cases (n = 213). Conclusions Objective measurement of preprocedural IR patient flow demonstrated considerable waste and highlighted high-yield areas of possible improvement. A data-driven approach may aid efficient delivery of IR care.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84977535670&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84977535670&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.05.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.05.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 27363297

AN - SCOPUS:84977535670

VL - 27

SP - 1189

EP - 1194

JO - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

JF - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

SN - 1051-0443

IS - 8

ER -