Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Comparing Clinical Productivity of Anesthesiology Groups

View through CrossRef
Background Intergroup comparisons of clinical productivity are important for strategic planning and evaluation of clinical and business operations. However, in a preliminary study, comparisons of two anesthesiology groups using "per full-time equivalent" measurements were confounded by different concurrencies or staffing ratios, whereas measurements based on "per operating room (OR) site," "per case," and "billed American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) units per hour of care" permitted meaningful comparisons despite differing concurrencies. The purpose of this study was to determine whether these measurements would allow for meaningful comparisons when applied to multiple groups. Methods Annual totals of total ASA units (tASA), 15-min time units, and the number of cases billed, as well as the average number of daily anesthetizing sites (OR sites) staffed and the average number of anesthesiologists required to the staff sites, were collected from each group that participated. All anesthesia care billed with ASA units was included, except for obstetric care. Any clinical service not billed using ASA units was excluded. Productivity measurements (concurrency, tASA/OR site, hours billed per OR site per day, hours billed per case, tASA billed per hour of anesthesia care, and base units per case) were calculated. Median and range for all groups and for private-practice and academic groups were determined. Results Eleven private-practice and nine academic groups from 12 states participated in the study. Productivity measurements that are influenced by duration of surgery (hours billed per case, tASA billed per hour of anesthesia care) differed significantly between groups, with private-practice groups having shorter duration than academic groups (median hours billed per case, 1.5 2.6, respectively). Although tASA/OR site measurements were similar in private-practice and academic groups, academic groups worked significantly longer hours billed per OR site per day (median, 6.0 h 7.8, respectively) to achieve the same level of tASA/OR site. Hourly billing productivity (tASA billed per hour of anesthesia care) correlated highly with surgical duration (hours billed per case). Conclusion This study demonstrates a method of comparing departmental clinical productivity between anesthesiology groups. Private-practice groups provided care for cases of shorter duration than academic groups. This difference was evident in several productivity measurements.
Title: Comparing Clinical Productivity of Anesthesiology Groups
Description:
Background Intergroup comparisons of clinical productivity are important for strategic planning and evaluation of clinical and business operations.
However, in a preliminary study, comparisons of two anesthesiology groups using "per full-time equivalent" measurements were confounded by different concurrencies or staffing ratios, whereas measurements based on "per operating room (OR) site," "per case," and "billed American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) units per hour of care" permitted meaningful comparisons despite differing concurrencies.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether these measurements would allow for meaningful comparisons when applied to multiple groups.
Methods Annual totals of total ASA units (tASA), 15-min time units, and the number of cases billed, as well as the average number of daily anesthetizing sites (OR sites) staffed and the average number of anesthesiologists required to the staff sites, were collected from each group that participated.
All anesthesia care billed with ASA units was included, except for obstetric care.
Any clinical service not billed using ASA units was excluded.
Productivity measurements (concurrency, tASA/OR site, hours billed per OR site per day, hours billed per case, tASA billed per hour of anesthesia care, and base units per case) were calculated.
Median and range for all groups and for private-practice and academic groups were determined.
Results Eleven private-practice and nine academic groups from 12 states participated in the study.
Productivity measurements that are influenced by duration of surgery (hours billed per case, tASA billed per hour of anesthesia care) differed significantly between groups, with private-practice groups having shorter duration than academic groups (median hours billed per case, 1.
5 2.
6, respectively).
Although tASA/OR site measurements were similar in private-practice and academic groups, academic groups worked significantly longer hours billed per OR site per day (median, 6.
0 h 7.
8, respectively) to achieve the same level of tASA/OR site.
Hourly billing productivity (tASA billed per hour of anesthesia care) correlated highly with surgical duration (hours billed per case).
Conclusion This study demonstrates a method of comparing departmental clinical productivity between anesthesiology groups.
Private-practice groups provided care for cases of shorter duration than academic groups.
This difference was evident in several productivity measurements.

Related Results

Measuring Clinical Productivity of Anesthesiology Groups
Measuring Clinical Productivity of Anesthesiology Groups
Abstract Benchmarking and comparing group productivity is an essential activity of data-driven management. For clinical anesthesiology, accomplishing this task is a daunt...
Application of innovative factors to increase labor productivity
Application of innovative factors to increase labor productivity
 The relevance of the research topic lies in the fact that increasing labor productivity is an urgent task for all levels of the economy. Labor productivity is the basis of long-te...
Exploring anesthesiology nurse’ presenteeism in China: cross-sectional study
Exploring anesthesiology nurse’ presenteeism in China: cross-sectional study
Abstract Background The department of anesthesiology is the main battlefield for the treatment of acute and critical patients, with high work risk a...
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging in Academic Anesthesiology in the United States: A Scoping Review
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging in Academic Anesthesiology in the United States: A Scoping Review
This review appraises diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) within academic anesthesiology. The authors discuss the history and gaps in anesthesiology DEIB with the ai...
Teaching Medical Students Clinical Anesthesia
Teaching Medical Students Clinical Anesthesia
There are many reasons for evaluating our approach and improving our teaching of America’s future doctors, whether they become anesthesiologists (recruitment) or participate in pat...

Back to Top