MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008463211

Comprehensive Custom-Pak® in Cataract and Vitreoretinal Surgery in Canadian Hospitals: Time and Budget Impact Analysis

2023· other· en· W7008463211 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCataract surgeryLiberian dollarCost–benefit analysisVitreoretinal surgeryCommoditySurgical proceduresEye careHealth care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Donna Punch,1 Jonathan S Davis,2 Rebecca Hahn,2 Rav Gill,3 Chia-Wen Hsiao,4 Richard Kara4 1Kensington Eye Institute (Retired), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; 2KJT Group, Inc, Rochester, NY, USA; 3Alcon Canada, Inc, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada; 4Alcon Vision LLC, Fort Worth, TX, USACorrespondence: Donna Punch, Tel +1 905-238-3228 ; +1 647-980-7716, Email mmdpunch@rogers.comPurpose: Surgical procedure packs are commonly used in ophthalmological surgeries, but quantitative evidence demonstrating the time efficiency and economic impact of their use is limited. Evaluating the time and cost of surgical pack use is particularly important for publicly funded healthcare systems with tight budgets and/or an emphasis on value-based care. This study sought to estimate the economic impact of comprehensive surgical pack use in cataract and vitreoretinal (retina) surgeries across operating room (OR), materials management, and accounting departments in Canada.Methods: A budget impact model developed for the United States (US) from a self-reported cross-sectional study was adapted for Canada. The US study obtained data via an online survey and timing exercises of surgical procedures. The model was adapted using relevant Canadian-specific labor and cost inputs. Use of generic commodity packs (no proprietary equipment-specific supplies) was compared to full utilization of Custom-Pak®, a comprehensive pack (disposables plus equipment-specific supplies) in cataract and retina surgeries at the facility and aggregate group (provincewide) levels.Results: Switching from generic to comprehensive pack use in all 2500 cataract procedures at a community hospital saves 287 labor hours per year, primarily in the materials management department. Surgery preparation (OR) hours saved allow for an additional 196 potential procedures annually. Most of the Canadian Dollar (CAD) $39,815 annual cost savings are realized for the OR. Aggregating across 50,000 cataract surgeries at the provincial level yields savings of 5608 hours and 3916 additional procedures, translating to hidden cost reductions of CAD$790,632 annually. Implementing full Custom-Pak use at the facility level in 1000 retina cases saves $10,650 annually; provincewide, 127 potential additional procedures can be gained.Conclusion: Comprehensive Custom-Pak use improves efficiency in cataract and retina surgeries saving substantial time and cost in Canadian hospitals, potentially allowing more patients to have these procedures, and reducing wait times.Keywords: cataract, retina, surgical instruments, economic models, Canada, hospital materials management

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207