Journal of the Operational Research Society

, Volume 62, Issue 10, pp 1851–1860 | Cite as

An exact approach for relating recovering surgical patient workload to the master surgical schedule

  • P T Vanberkel
  • R J Boucherie
  • E W Hans
  • J L Hurink
  • W A M van Lent
  • W H van Harten
Case-Oriented Paper

Abstract

No other department influences the workload of a hospital more than the Department of Surgery and in particular, the activities in the operating room. These activities are governed by the master surgical schedule (MSS), which states which patient types receive surgery on which day. In this paper, we describe an analytical approach to project the workload for downstream departments based on this MSS. Specifically, the ward occupancy distributions, patient admission/discharge distributions and the distributions for ongoing interventions/treatments are computed. Recovering after surgery requires the support of multiple departments, such as nursing, physiotherapy, rehabilitation and long-term care. With our model, managers from these departments can determine their workload by aggregating tasks associated with recovering surgical patients. The model, which supported the development of a new MSS at the Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, provides the foundation for a decision support tool to relate downstream hospital departments to the operating room.

Keywords

probability queueing hospitals surgical scheduling ward occupancy 

References

  1. Adan IJBF and Vissers JMH (2002). Patient mix optimisation in hospital admission planning: A case study. Int J Opns Prod Mngt 22: 445–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beliën J and Demeulemeester E (2007). Building cyclic master surgery schedules with leveled resulting bed occupancy. Eur J Opl Res 176: 1185–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beliën J, Demeulemeester E and Cardoen B (2006). Visualizing the demand for various resources as a function of the master surgery schedule: A case study. J Med Syst 30: 343–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beliën J, Demeulemeester E and Cardoen B (2009). A decision support system for cyclic master surgery scheduling with multiple objectives. J Sched 12: 147–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blake JT and Carter MW (1997). Surgical process scheduling: A structured review. J Soc Health Syst 5 (3): 17–30.Google Scholar
  6. Blake JT and Donald J (2002). Mount Sinai Hospital uses integer programming to allocate operating room time. Interfaces 32 (2): 63–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cardoen B, Demeulemeester E and Beliën J (2010). Operating room planning and scheduling: A literature review. Eur J Opl Res 201: 921–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Griffiths JD, Price-Lloyd N, Smithies M and Williams JE (2005). Modelling the requirement for supplementary nurses in an intensive care unit. J Opl Res Soc 56: 126–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harris RA (1986). Hospital bed requirements planning. Eur J Opl Res 25: 121–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Litvak E and Long MC (2000). Cost and quality under managed care: Irreconcilable differences. Am J Manag C 6: 305–312.Google Scholar
  11. McManus ML, Long MC, Cooper A, Mandell J, Pagano DMBM and Litvak E (2003). Variability in surgical caseload and access to intensive care services. Anesthesiology 98: 1491–1496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Santibáñez P, Begen M and Atkins D (2007). Surgical block scheduling in a system of hospitals: An application to resource and wait list management in a British Columbia health authority. Health Care Mngt Sci 10: 269–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Van Houdenhoven M, van Oostrum JM, Hans EW, Gerhard W and Kazemier G (2007). Improving operating room efficiency by applying bin-packing and portfolio techniques to surgical case scheduling. Anesth Analg 105: 707–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Van Houdenhoven M, van Oostrum JM, Wullink G, Hans E, Hurink JL, Bakker J and Kazemier G (2008). Fewer intensive care unit refusals and a higher capacity utilization by using a cyclic surgical case schedule. J Crit Care 23: 222–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Van Oostrum JM, van Houdenhoven M, Hurink JL, Wullink EWHG and Kazemier G (2008). A master surgical scheduling approach for cyclic scheduling in operating room departments. OR Spectrum 30: 355–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Van Oostrum JM, Bredenhoff E and Hans EW (2010). Suitability and managerial implications of a master surgical scheduling approach. Ann Opns Res 178: 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Vanberkel PT and Blake JT (2007). A comprehensive simulation for wait time reduction and capacity planning applied in general surgery. Health Care Mngt Sci 10: 373–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vanberkel PT, Boucherie RJ, Hans EW and Hurink J (2010). A survey of health care models that encompass multiple departments. Int J Health Mngt Inform 1: 37–69.Google Scholar
  19. Wachtel RE and Dexter F (2008). Tactical increases in operating room block time for capacity planning should not be based on utilization. Anesth Analg 106: 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Operational Research Society 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • P T Vanberkel
    • 1
    • 2
  • R J Boucherie
    • 1
  • E W Hans
    • 1
  • J L Hurink
    • 1
  • W A M van Lent
    • 1
    • 2
  • W H van Harten
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations