141 – ASSESSMENT OF PATIENT SATISFACTION WITH THE DAY SURGERY PROGRAM AT THE ROYAL UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL IN SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Due to bed and resource constraints at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, we have seen an increase in utilization of the day surgery program for acute Orthopedic traumatic injuries in ambulatory patients. The purpose of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with the Saskatoon Health Region Orthopedic trauma day surgery program by collecting data pertaining to wait-times, demographics, communication, coping skills at home and pain management. Method: A patient-oriented questionnaire was devised and administered to eligible adult patients presenting for day surgery Orthopedic Trauma procedures over a three month period. Inclusion criteria included age greater than 18 and written english comprehension. Between July 12 and October 2, 2009, 45 patients consented to participate. The questionnaire was formulated to encapsulate all the potential concerns associated with the day-surgery program, which included expected wait-times, pain control, and communication between the orthopedic surgeon and the patient. Demographics and actual wait-times were obtained from hospital data. Results: There was a marked discrepancy between the actual and anticipated waiting times for day surgery. However, 64% of the patients were still satisfied with the waiting times despite the difference. Seventy three percent of patients did not think that admission to hospital would lead to earlier surgery. There was an obvious difference in demographics with 53% of patients living outside city limits. Demographics played an important role in patient satisfaction. Patients living within the city limits had a better experience compared to patients living outside city limits. Patients did have difficulty managing at home. The overall satisfaction was 68% at the conclusion of the study. Conclusion: Patients were overall satisfied with the day surgery program. We have identified several areas where we can improve. This involve better pain management, better communication and assessment of the bio-socioeconomic circumstances of patients. We will also have a lower threshold for admitting non residents of Saskatoon. We will relay a more realistic timeframe for surgery, as calculated in the study, to patients .
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".