Bjorn P Berg1, Michael Murr2, David Chermak3, Jonathan Woodall3, Michael Pignone4, Robert S Sandler5, Brian T Denton6. 1. Department of Systems Engineering & Operations Research, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia (BPB). 2. Edward P. Fitts Department of Industrial & Systems Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina (MM) 3. Performance Services, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina (DC, JW) 4. Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology (MP) University of North Carolina, Chapel Hil 5. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (RSS), University of North Carolina, Chapel Hil 6. Department of Industrial & Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (BTD)
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure the cost of nonattendance ("no-shows") and benefit of overbooking and interventions to reduce no-shows for an outpatient endoscopy suite. METHODS: We used a discrete-event simulation model to determine improved overbooking scheduling policies and examine the effect of no-shows on procedure utilization and expected net gain, defined as the difference in expected revenue based on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reimbursement rates and variable costs based on the sum of patient waiting time and provider and staff overtime. No-show rates were estimated from historical attendance (18% on average, with a sensitivity range of 12%-24%). We then evaluated the effectiveness of scheduling additional patients and the effect of no-show reduction interventions on the expected net gain. RESULTS: The base schedule booked 24 patients per day. The daily expected net gain with perfect attendance is $4433.32. The daily loss attributed to the base case no-show rate of 18% is $725.42 (16.4% of net gain), ranging from $472.14 to $1019.29 (10.7%-23.0% of net gain). Implementing no-show interventions reduced net loss by $166.61 to $463.09 (3.8%-10.5% of net gain). The overbooking policy of 9 additional patients per day resulted in no loss in expected net gain when compared with the reference scenario. CONCLUSIONS: No-shows can significantly decrease the expected net gain of outpatient procedure centers. Overbooking can help mitigate the impact of no-shows on a suite's expected net gain and has a lower expected cost of implementation to the provider than intervention strategies.
OBJECTIVE: To measure the cost of nonattendance ("no-shows") and benefit of overbooking and interventions to reduce no-shows for an outpatient endoscopy suite. METHODS: We used a discrete-event simulation model to determine improved overbooking scheduling policies and examine the effect of no-shows on procedure utilization and expected net gain, defined as the difference in expected revenue based on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reimbursement rates and variable costs based on the sum of patient waiting time and provider and staff overtime. No-show rates were estimated from historical attendance (18% on average, with a sensitivity range of 12%-24%). We then evaluated the effectiveness of scheduling additional patients and the effect of no-show reduction interventions on the expected net gain. RESULTS: The base schedule booked 24 patients per day. The daily expected net gain with perfect attendance is $4433.32. The daily loss attributed to the base case no-show rate of 18% is $725.42 (16.4% of net gain), ranging from $472.14 to $1019.29 (10.7%-23.0% of net gain). Implementing no-show interventions reduced net loss by $166.61 to $463.09 (3.8%-10.5% of net gain). The overbooking policy of 9 additional patients per day resulted in no loss in expected net gain when compared with the reference scenario. CONCLUSIONS: No-shows can significantly decrease the expected net gain of outpatient procedure centers. Overbooking can help mitigate the impact of no-shows on a suite's expected net gain and has a lower expected cost of implementation to the provider than intervention strategies.
Entities:
Keywords:
colorectal cancer; discrete event simulation; efficiency; gastroenterology; operations research
Authors: Joan M Griffin; Erin M Hulbert; Sally W Vernon; David Nelson; Emily M Hagel; Sean Nugent; Alisha Baines Simon; Ann Bangerter; Michelle van Ryn Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Bjorn Berg; Brian Denton; Heidi Nelson; Hari Balasubramanian; Ahmed Rahman; Angela Bailey; Keith Lindor Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2009-09-22 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Karen E Kim; Fornessa Randal; Matt Johnson; Michael Quinn; Chieko Maene; Sonja Hoover; Valerie Richmond-Reese; Florence K L Tangka; Djenaba A Joseph; Sujha Subramanian Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Mark W Reid; Folasade P May; Bibiana Martinez; Samuel Cohen; Hank Wang; Demetrius L Williams; Brennan M R Spiegel Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Valerie Gausman; Giulio Quarta; Michelle H Lee; Natalia Chtourmine; Carmelita Ganotisi; Frances Nanton-Gonzalez; Chui Ling Ng; Jungwon Jun; Leslie Perez; Jason A Dominitz; Scott E Sherman; Michael A Poles; Peter S Liang Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 3.174
Authors: Bryan G Sauer; Kanwar P Singh; Barry L Wagner; Matthew S Vanden Hoek; Katherine Twilley; Steven M Cohn; Vanessa M Shami; Andrew Y Wang Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2016-10-28