MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008577435 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz047.147

A148 EFFICIENCY IN THE ENDOSCOPY UNIT: CAN WE ‘TURN AROUND’ ROOM TURNOVER?

2020· article· en· W3008577435 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carolyn Michelle Tan, Jill Tinmouth, Matt A. Bernstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Healthcare and Medical Tourism
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColonoscopySigmoidoscopyTurnoverEndoscopyUnit (ring theory)NursingMedical emergencySurgeryPsychologyInternal medicineColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Endoscopy units across Canada are being challenged to meet the growing demand for procedures despite limited resources, highlighting the need to optimize endoscopy unit efficiency. Earlier studies have found that non-procedural factors, such as room turnover, represent an ideal target to improve efficiency. Aims The objective of this research project was to identify practices that will improve efficiency for routine outpatient gastrointestinal (GI) procedures at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (SHSC). There were 2 sub-aims: 1) to understand practices at Toronto hospitals that shorten room turnover time and 2) to describe the variation in room turnover time at SHSC. Methods Sub-aim #1: A survey of endoscopy units at five other Toronto hospitals was completed. Questions were designed to gain a better understanding of routine practices and any initiatives undertaken to improve room turnover efficiency. Sub-aim #2: Median room turnover time from April 2018 to March 2019, defined as ‘patient out’ to ‘patient in’, was reported in an anonymized fashion for the following categories: 1) by endoscopist, 2) by nurse, and 3) by unique endoscopist-nurse pair. Only data from routine outpatient endoscopic procedures (e.g. colonoscopy, gastroscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy) were included. In order to evaluate turnover times by endoscopist-nurse pair, consecutive cases not performed by the same pair were excluded. Procedures affected by patient- and transportation-related delays were also excluded. Results Of the five centers surveyed, three allocated 5 minutes for turnover and two allocated 10 minutes. All centers reported tracking turnover time and four centers reported undertaking initiatives to decrease turnover time such as involving a flow team, hiring team attendants, and sharing performance data. Over the 12-month period, 2504 routine outpatient GI endoscopic procedures were performed at SHSC, with 803 cases meeting inclusion criteria. Median turnover time for the unit was 6 minutes, ranging from 5 to 9 minutes across endoscopists, 5 to 7 minutes across nurses, and 3 to 10 minutes across unique endoscopist-nurse pairs (Figure 1). Efficiency of endoscopist-nurse pairs did not correlate with the number of cases performed as a pair over the 12-month period. Conclusions Endoscopy room turnover times at SHSC are similar to those reported by other local centers, with important variation across endoscopists and nurses. The next phase of this study will involve directly observing each of the most and least efficient individuals and pairs and recording common practices. It is anticipated that these findings will enable us to identify efficient practices that should be incorporated into standard operating procedures and training for endoscopy room personnel. Funding Agencies None

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGlobal Healthcare and Medical TourismFrench-language works237,207