Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Does not support shifting OR planning from utilization metrics; leaves open prospective validation of contribution margin criteria.
In Brief When a decision has been made to expand operating room (OR) capacity, the choice of surgical subspecialties to receive additional block time and fill the additional OR capacity is a tactical decision. Such decisions are made approximately once a year. Afterwards, typically a few months before the day of surgery, a second stage occurs in which operational decisions allocate OR time and determine the hours of staffing for each specialty based on its expected workload. In practice, cases are not scheduled into block time that has been planned tactically, but instead are scheduled during the second stage into the staffed time that is allocated operationally. This article reviews the literature on tactical decision-making for expansion of OR capacity. When additional OR capacity is available, it should be planned for those subspecialties that have the greatest contribution margin per OR hour, that have the potential for growth, and that have minimal need for limited resources such as intensive care unit beds. Numerous reasons are presented to explain why tactical planning of additional block time should not be based on current or past utilization of block time. IMPLICATIONS: Tactical planning of additional operating room block time for capacity expansion must be differentiated from a second, operational stage of matching staffing to expected workload. Ten reasons are presented to explain why tactical planning of block time should not be based on utilization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wachtel et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: