A112 THE IMPACT OF CENTRAL COORDINATION ON ENDOSCOPY EFFICIENCY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been far reaching and have necessitated many changes to healthcare delivery. At the QEII Health Sciences Center physical space limitations for patient check-in and recovery have restricted outpatient endoscopy to 3 of 4 available endoscopy suites. On June 1, 2020 a new system of central endoscopy triage and coordination for the Division of Digestive Care and Endoscopy (DC&E) was implemented in an effort to increase efficiency and maintain patient access to endoscopy. The components of the RESET (Re-introduce Endoscopy Safely and EfficienTly) Plan included a) a new endoscopy coordinator role to manage a common endoscopy waitlist, endoscopist schedules, and booking clerks, b) a modified triage system to improve waitlist consistency, c) a common endoscopy waitlist with patients booked in the next available appointment regardless of endoscopist, d) discontinuation of fixed endoscopy slots for endoscopists, and e) appointment scheduling no sooner than 4-weeks in advance to minimize no-shows and last-minute cancellations. Aims The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the RESET Plan on the efficiency of DC&E endoscopy. Methods A retrospective pre- and post-implementation study evaluating the volume and efficiency of outpatient endoscopy before and after implementation of the RESET Plan. The Pre-RESET period included all procedures performed from June 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019. The Post-RESET period included all procedures performed from June 1, 2020 to October 31, 2020. A separate endoscopy suite and triage system is used for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and these cases were excluded. Early effectiveness outcomes were reported including a comparison of the number of endoscopic procedures per week and per list, pre- and post- implementation. Data analysis was primarily descriptive with data expressed as frequencies, means (SD), and proportions (%). Exploratory group comparisons were performed using independent-samples T-Test. Results During the 5-month Pre-RESET period, 2203 endoscopic procedures were performed. During the Post-RESET period a total of 1920 procedures were performed. Due to pandemic restrictions, there was a 29% decrease in available endoscopy lists from 2019 to 2020. There was a 24% increase in the number procedures performed per endoscopy list, from 6.4 to 8.0 (p=0.004, 95% CI 0.52–2.53), pre- and post-RESET. Conclusions While the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare delivery, it has also provided an opportunity to implement health system structure and process changes. The RESET Plan resulted in significant gains in efficiency which largely offset losses in endoscopy throughput imposed by COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. Future research will determine what patient and health system factors most significantly impact system efficiency as well as the cost-effectiveness of the RESET Plan. Funding Agencies CAG
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 | 0.007 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".