MACHINE LEARNING PREDICTION AND OPTIMIZATION IMPROVES ELECTIVE ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY SCHEDULING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Total knee and hip arthroplasty (TKA and THA) are the most commonly performed surgical procedures, the costs of which constitute a significant healthcare burden. Improving access to care for THA/TKA requires better efficiency. It is hypothesized that this may be possible through a two-stage approach that utilizes prediction of surgical time to enable optimization of operating room (OR) schedules. Data from 499,432 elective unilateral arthroplasty procedures, including 302,490 TKAs, and 196,942 THAs, performed from 2014-2019 was extracted from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical and Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database. A deep multilayer perceptron model was trained to predict duration of surgery (DOS) based on pre-operative clinical and biochemical patient factors. A two-stage approach, utilizing predicted DOS from a held out “test” dataset, was utilized to inform the daily OR schedule. The objective function of the optimization was the total OR utilization, with a penalty for overtime. The scheduling problem and constraints were simulated based on a high-volume elective arthroplasty centre in Canada. This approach was compared to current patient scheduling based on mean procedure DOS. Approaches were compared by performing 1000 simulated OR schedules. The predict then optimize approach achieved an 18% increase in OR utilization over the mean regressor. The two-stage approach reduced overtime by 25-minutes per OR day, however it created a 7-minute increase in underutilization. Better objective value was seen in 85.1% of the simulations. With deep learning prediction and mathematical optimization of patient scheduling it is possible to improve overall OR utilization compared to typical scheduling practices. Maximizing utilization of existing healthcare resources can, in limited resource environments, improve patient's access to arthritis care by increasing patient throughput, reducing surgical wait times and in the immediate future, help clear the backlog associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".