Cost of Waiting on an Orthopaedic Waiting List: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Approximately 30% Australians suffer from arthritis and other musculoskeletal disorders. From 2003-2033 there is a predicted 223% increase in expenditure on health management of musculoskeletal disorders. There is evidence of increasing prevalence of orthopaedic complaints, in longer waiting lists for specialist consultations in public hospital outpatient clinics. Little is known about the costs and ramifications of waiting for orthopaedic consultations. Aim: Establish what is known about the direct and indirect costs of being placed on a waiting list for an orthopaedic consultation. Method: Patient and Outcome search strategy of Medline, Embase, Pubmed, NHS Economic evaluation database (NHS-EED) from each database inception date. Handsearching of reference lists of included papers alsooccurred. A realist synthesis framework underpinned the review, using a ubiquitous patient journey to map available literature on the impact of waiting. Hierarchy of evidence was reported using NHMRC criteria andarticles critically appraised using either the PEDRo or CASP criteria (relevant to the design). A purpose-built data extraction instrument was developed. Results: We identified 786 studies, of which 139 were relevant, including a systematic review (Hoogeboom et al) with 15 included articles which were added to the list of eligible papers (and the review itself deleted), leaving 153 included articles; 17 were relevant to the review. Fourteen papers reported on quality of life and four reported on costs, two of these papers reported on both and all were of low to moderate quality. The research was not based on a comprehensive understanding of the stages of waiting, and there were inconclusive outcomes for quality of life and cost. Conclusion: There is scant evidence of the impact on quality of life and costs of waiting for orthopaedic outpatient appointments. Future research should aim for improved methodological quality and use patientfocused quality of life measures, and validated measures of cost. Abbreviations: NHMRC – National Health and Medical Research Council; PROMS – Patient Related Outcome Measures; QoL – Quality of Life; WOMAC – Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; YLD – Years Lived With Disability
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 | 0.018 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".