| Literature DB >> 34853667 |
Abstract
We formulated a new stochastic programming formulation to solve the dynamic scheduling problem in a given set of elective surgeries in the day of operation. The problem is complicated by the fact that the exact surgery durations are not known in advance. Elective surgeries could be performed in parallel in a subset of operating rooms. The appointment times and assignments of surgeries were planned by an experienced nurses in advance. We present a mathematical model to capture the nature of dynamic scheduling problem. We propose an efficient solution based on an improved genetic algorithm (IGA). Our numerical results showed that dynamic scheduling with the IGA improves the resource utilization as measured by surgeon waiting time and operation room idle time.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34853667 PMCID: PMC8629632 DOI: 10.1155/2021/1559050
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Dynamic surgery rescheduling process.
Parameters and description.
| Parameter | Description |
|---|---|
|
| Set of remaining surgeries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Estimated duration of surgery |
|
| Arrival time of surgeon |
|
| Starting time of surgery |
|
| Completion time of surgery |
|
| Decision-making cost of surgery |
|
| Number of surgeries |
|
| Number of operating rooms |
|
| Index of decision points |
|
| Number of remaining surgeries at the decision point |
|
| Unit idle time cost of operating room |
|
| Unit waiting time cost of surgeon |
|
| Set of operating rooms |
|
| Index of operating rooms |
Figure 2Translation process of chromosome encoding.
Figure 3Results of the instances: (a) g=1, (b) g=2, (c) g=3, (d) g=4, (e) g=5, (f) g=6.
Optimal solution of the instance.
| Optimal individual | Fitness value | CPU time (sec) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min | Ref | |||
|
|
| 110 | 257.61 | 101.50 |
|
|
| 196 | 505.40 | 101.28 |
|
|
| 204 | 611.42 | 101.32 |
|
|
| 56 | 678.95 | 101.16 |
|
|
| 258 | 661.81 | 101.18 |
|
|
| 132 | 462.78 | 101.24 |
Results for the problem instances.
| Workload | Variance | Relative benefit (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min. | Max. | Average | ||
| WS < 100% | VD < 25% | 24.25 | 41.74 | 29.06 |
| VD > 25% | 27.56 | 49.00 | 33.45 | |
|
| ||||
| WS > 100% | VD < 25% | 12.53 | 26.81 | 16.62 |
| VD > 25% | 16.85 | 35.17 | 23.90 | |
Comparison of our method with other methods.
| Method | Optimality gap (%) |
|---|---|
| The longest mean service duration first sequence [ | 9.5 |
| Two-stage stochastic programming approximation [ | 2.7 |
| First-come-first-served strategy [ | 6.0 |
Comparison of the IGA with local search algorithm for instances.
| 3 operating rooms | 6 operating rooms | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instance no. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| Optimality gap (%) | 6.4 | 5.1 | 9.0 | 12.3 | 15.6 | 9.8 |