The Experts below are selected from a list of 55872 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Andrea J. Curtis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Streamlining Elective Surgery care in a public hospital: the Alfred experience.
The Medical journal of Australia, 2011Co-Authors: Judy Lowthian, Andrea J. Curtis, Bernadette L Comitti, Peter Cameron, Martin J Keogh, William R. Johnson, James Tomlinson, Andrew StrippAbstract:Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of redesigning and streamlining perioperative services. Design: A before-and-after evaluation, with retrospective analysis of de-identified administrative data. Setting: A major tertiary hospital, Melbourne, Australia. Participants: Patients undergoing Elective Surgery, February 2005 ― February 2010. Intervention: Implementing a process redesign to streamline clinical pathways for Elective Surgery, with a focus on the patient journey from referral to discharge, and establishing a separate, dedicated Elective Surgery facility. Main outcome measures: Numbers of patients waiting beyond national recommended waiting times for Elective Surgery; hospital-initiated postponement (HIP) rates for Elective Surgery; and lengths of stay (LOS), both combined and for specific diagnostic-related groups. Results: The clinical process redesign resulted in a sustained downward trend in the number of Elective Surgery patients waiting longer than national recommended maximum waiting times. HIP rates were reduced to 1% in the dedicated Elective Surgery facility, and there was a significant reduction in the combined LOS, as well as the LOS for the most common surgical procedures (P< 0.001). Conclusions: Clinical process redesign of perioperative services and collocation of a separate Elective Surgery centre improved (i) timeliness of care for Elective Surgery patients and (ii) key indicators (LOS and HIP rates) for planned Elective admissions.
-
Waiting lists and Elective Surgery: ordering the queue
The Medical journal of Australia, 2010Co-Authors: Andrea J. Curtis, Colin Russell, Johannes Uiltje Stoelwinder, John J McneilAbstract:In the Australian public health system, access to Elective Surgery is rationed through the use of waiting lists in which patients are assigned to broad urgency categories. Surgeons are principally responsible for referring patients to waiting lists, deciding on the appropriate urgency category, and selecting patients from the waiting list to receive Surgery. There are few agreed-upon criteria to help surgeons make these decisions, leading to striking differences between institutions in proportions of patients allocated to urgency categories. In other countries with publicly funded health systems, programs have been developed that aim to make prioritisation more consistent and access to Surgery more equitable. As demand for health care increases, similar programs should be established in Australia using relevant clinical and psychosocial factors. Prioritisation methodology adapted for Elective Surgery may have a role in prioritising high-demand procedures in other areas of health care.
John J Mcneil - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Waiting lists and Elective Surgery: ordering the queue
The Medical journal of Australia, 2010Co-Authors: Andrea J. Curtis, Colin Russell, Johannes Uiltje Stoelwinder, John J McneilAbstract:In the Australian public health system, access to Elective Surgery is rationed through the use of waiting lists in which patients are assigned to broad urgency categories. Surgeons are principally responsible for referring patients to waiting lists, deciding on the appropriate urgency category, and selecting patients from the waiting list to receive Surgery. There are few agreed-upon criteria to help surgeons make these decisions, leading to striking differences between institutions in proportions of patients allocated to urgency categories. In other countries with publicly funded health systems, programs have been developed that aim to make prioritisation more consistent and access to Surgery more equitable. As demand for health care increases, similar programs should be established in Australia using relevant clinical and psychosocial factors. Prioritisation methodology adapted for Elective Surgery may have a role in prioritising high-demand procedures in other areas of health care.
-
Clinical categorization for Elective Surgery in Victoria
ANZ journal of surgery, 2003Co-Authors: Colin Russell, Maree Roberts, Timothy G Williamson, Jane Mckercher, Simon E Jolly, John J McneilAbstract:Aim: The aim of the present paper was to assess trends in clinician's utilization of urgency categories for Elective Surgery. Methods: The present paper reviews the additions to the Victorian Elective Surgery waiting list for hip replacement and prostatectomy as recorded by the Elective Surgery Information System database. Review of general trends in utilization over two separate 12 month periods were undertaken. Results: There is inconsistency in categorization of patients referred to the waiting list for hip joint replacement and prostatectomy. An increasing trend to categorize patients as semi-urgent (category 2) in preference to non-urgent (category 3) emerged over this period (category creep). Semi-urgent cases might be competing for access within the category 2 band with less urgent cases. Conclusions: There seems to be an increasing imbalance between demand for and availability of Elective Surgery for lower urgency Elective surgical procedures. This imbalance, characterized by lengthening waiting times, means that not all patients will receive treatment within the clinically recommended waiting times. The variable approach to categorization of urgency suggests that the process lacks objectivity and consensus. Simple clinical tools to assist prioritization are currently being evaluated in Victoria (Australia) and other countries.
Mariano E. Menendez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Public Perceptions of Resuming Elective Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
The Journal of arthroplasty, 2020Co-Authors: Michael A. Moverman, Richard N. Puzzitiello, Nicholas R. Pagani, C. Lowry Barnes, Andrew Jawa, Mariano E. MenendezAbstract:Abstract Background Many United States health-systems are grappling with how to safely resume Elective Surgery amid the COVID-19 pandemic. We used online crowdsourcing to explore public perceptions and concerns towards resuming Elective Surgery during the pandemic, and to determine factors associated with the preferred timing of Surgery after health-systems reopen. Methods A 21-question survey was completed by 722 members of the public using Amazon Mechanical Turk. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with the timing of preferred Surgery after health-systems reopen. Results Most (61%) participants were concerned with contracting COVID-19 during the surgical process, primarily during check-in and in waiting-room areas, as well as through excessive interactions with staff. Overall, 57% would choose to have their Surgery at a hospital over an outpatient Surgery center. About 1 in 4 (27%) would feel comfortable undergoing Elective Surgery in the first month of health-systems reopening. After multivariable adjustment, native English speaking (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.04-6.4; P=0.042), male sex (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3-2.7; P Conclusion Women and non-native English speakers may be more hesitant to undergo Elective Surgery amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite concerns of contagion, more than half of the public favors a hospital setting over an outpatient Surgery center for their Elective Surgery. Concerted efforts to minimize patient congestion and unnecessary face-to-face interactions may prove most effective in reducing public anxiety and concerns over the safety of resuming Elective care.
Edward E. Cornwell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Incremental Cost of Emergency Versus Elective Surgery
Annals of surgery, 2015Co-Authors: Adil H. Haider, Augustine Obirieze, Catherine G. Velopulos, Patrick Richard, Asad Latif, Valerie K. Scott, Cheryl K. Zogg, Elliott R. Haut, David T. Efron, Edward E. CornwellAbstract:Objective:To determine hospital costs and the adjusted risk of death associated with emergent versus Elective Surgery.Background:Emergency Surgery has a higher cost and worse outcomes compared with Elective Surgery. However, no national estimates of the excess burden of emergency Surgery exist.Metho
Jacques Menetrey - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
COVID-19 - ESSKA guidelines and recommendations for resuming Elective Surgery
Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2020Co-Authors: Caroline Mouton, Michael T. Hirschmann, Matthieu Ollivier, Romain Seil, Jacques MenetreyAbstract:The roadmap to Elective Surgery resumption after this COVID-19 pandemic should be progressive and cautious. The aim of this paper was to give recommendations and guidelines for resuming Elective orthopedic Surgery in the safest environment possible. Elective Surgery should be performed in COVID-free facilities and hospital stay should be as short as possible. For matters of safety, patients considered first for Surgery should be carefully selected according to COVID infection status/exposure, age, ASA physical status classification system / risk factors, socio-professional situation and surgical indication. A strategy for resuming Elective Surgery in four phases is proposed. Preoperative testing for COVID-19 infection is highly recommended. In any cases, COVID symptoms including fever and increased temperature should be constantly monitored until the day of Surgery. Elective Surgery should be postponed at the slightest suspicion of a COVID-19 infection. In case of Surgery, adapted personal protective equipment in terms of gowns, gloves, masks and eye protection is highly recommended and described.