Evaluating Outcomes of Plastic Surgery in an Ambulatory Setting: An Efficiency Model for High-Volume Procedures in Northern Ontario

Background Ambulatory plastic surgery has emerged as a safe and efficient alternative to hospital-based care, particularly in underserved areas like Northern Ontario. This study aimed to evaluate the short term outcomes of plastic surgery procedures performed in a Northern Ontario ambulatory office setting. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted for 505 procedures, performed from August 2023 to August 2024, at one plastic surgery clinic. Patient factors including age, gender, smoking status, use of blood thinners, primary diagnosis and referring provider were collected. Along with surgical outcomes including procedure type, complications, and urgent follow-up visits within two weeks of operation. Descriptive evaluation was used to evaluate outcome trends. Results The majority of patient referrals came from primary care physicians for a wide range of procedures. The most common procedures performed in the clinic were skin cancer biopsies and carpal tunnel release. The cohort included 505 patients aged 16 to 100 years (median age 64), with 48.7% male, 51.1% female, and 0.2% unspecified. There was an overall incidence of 8% for postoperative complications, with infections being the most frequent. Complication rates varied by procedure, with carpal tunnel release showing the lowest rate of 1.5%, and punch biopsies showing the highest rate at 11.6% which decreased after a procedural change. The majority of complications arose among the 70-80 age range. Conclusions This study demonstrates that office-based plastic surgery procedures in Northern Ontario can be performed safely and efficiently. Findings support the growing role of ambulatory surgical care, particularly in regions with limited access to hospital-based services. Tailored approaches for older patients, along with procedural refinements, can further enhance safety. Strengthening integration with primary care may improve efficiency and outcomes. Further multicenter studies are recommended to validate these findings and inform broader adoption.