Effectiveness of a new short-stay unit for elective low complexity patients’ admissions to improve patient flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objective: Specialized care in an acute hospital is the highest resource consuming type of health care. Performance improvement in health care should look for a better application of medical knowledge and resource consuming at the same time as managers locally redesigned processes and organizations in order to be more cost-effective at healthcare services delivery. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effectiveness of creating a short-stay unit for elective patients as an alternative to the elective patients being admitted in an acute ward. Methods: We included all elective patients admitted in a university hospital between the 1st of January and the 31st of December 2007, as well as those admitted during the same period of 2009, after two hospital wards transformation into a short-stay unit. We used the Hospital General Database for collecting information on years 2007 and 2009. Main key performance indicators were length of stay, pre-surgery length of stay, rotation rate, discharge planning rate and cost. For statistical bivariate analysis, we used a Chi-squared for linear trend for qualitative variables and a T-test and a Wilcoxon signed ranks test and a Mann-Whitney test for non-normal continuous variables. Significance at p < .05 was assumed throughout. Results: We included 10,678 patients, 4,423 during 2007 and 6,255 during 2009. Mean length of stay was 4.3 days (IC 95%: 4.09-4.51) in 2007 and 2.8 days (IC 95%: 2.61-3.01) in 2009 (p < .05). Pre-surgery length of stay was reduced from 0.5 days (IC 95%: 0.44-0.56) in 2007 to 0.2 days (IC 95%: 0.17-0.23) in 2009 (p < .05). The rotation rate was of 92 patients/bed in 2007 and of 126 patients/bed in 2009 (p < .05). The median number of planned discharges grew from 43.05% in 2007 to 86.01% in 2009. Closing two hospital wards at weekends has generated savings of €805,376.32 through the reduction of 22 nurse employees. Conclusions: In conclusion, this approach to hospital bed management in a tertiary hospital has proven both possible and efficient. The creation of short-stay units for elective patient admissions allowed an increase in productivity per hospital bed due to a higher rotation rate and a reduction in human resources costs due to closing hospital wards at weekends.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".