IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v286y2020i1d10.1007_s10479-018-3008-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Operating room scheduling under waiting time constraints: the Chilean GES plan

Author

Listed:
  • Javiera Barrera

    (Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez)

  • Rodrigo A. Carrasco

    (Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez)

  • Susana Mondschein

    (Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez)

  • Gianpiero Canessa

    (Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez)

  • David Rojas-Zalazar

    (Universidad de Chile)

Abstract

In 2000, Chile introduced profound health reforms to achieve a more equitable and fairer system (GES plan). The reforms established a maximum waiting time between diagnosis and treatment for a set of diseases, described as an opportunity guarantee within the reform. If the maximum waiting time is exceeded, the patient is referred to another (private) facility and receives a voucher to cover the additional expenses. This voucher is paid by the health provider that had to do the procedure, which generally is a public hospital. In general, this reform has improved the service for patients with GES pathologies at the expense of patients with non-GES pathologies. These new conditions create a complicated planning scenario for hospitals, in which the hospital’s OR Manager must balance the fulfillment of these opportunity guarantees and the timely service of patients not covered by the guarantee. With the collaboration of the Instituto de Neurocirugía, in Santiago, Chile, we developed a mathematical model based on stochastic dynamic programming to schedule surgeries in order to minimize the cost of referrals to the private sector. Given the large size of the state space, we developed an heuristic to compute good solutions in reasonable time and analyzed its performance. Our experimental results, with both simulated and real data, show that our algorithm performs close to optimum and improves upon the current practice. When we compared the results of our heuristic against those obtained by the hospital’s OR manager in a simulation setting with real data, we reduced the overtime from occurring 21% of the time to zero, and the non-GES average waiting list’s length from 71 to 58 patients, without worsening the average throughput.

Suggested Citation

  • Javiera Barrera & Rodrigo A. Carrasco & Susana Mondschein & Gianpiero Canessa & David Rojas-Zalazar, 2020. "Operating room scheduling under waiting time constraints: the Chilean GES plan," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 286(1), pages 501-527, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:286:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-018-3008-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-018-3008-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-018-3008-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-018-3008-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pablo Santibáñez & Mehmet Begen & Derek Atkins, 2007. "Surgical block scheduling in a system of hospitals: an application to resource and wait list management in a British Columbia health authority," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 269-282, September.
    2. Bernardetta Addis & Giuliana Carello & Andrea Grosso & Elena Tànfani, 2016. "Operating room scheduling and rescheduling: a rolling horizon approach," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 206-232, June.
    3. Belien, Jeroen & Demeulemeester, Erik, 2007. "Building cyclic master surgery schedules with leveled resulting bed occupancy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(2), pages 1185-1204, January.
    4. Angela Testi & Elena Tànfani, 2009. "Tactical and operational decisions for operating room planning: Efficiency and welfare implications," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 363-373, December.
    5. Hans, Erwin & Wullink, Gerhard & van Houdenhoven, Mark & Kazemier, Geert, 2008. "Robust surgery loading," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(3), pages 1038-1050, March.
    6. Astaraky, Davood & Patrick, Jonathan, 2015. "A simulation based approximate dynamic programming approach to multi-class, multi-resource surgical scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(1), pages 309-319.
    7. Brian Denton & James Viapiano & Andrea Vogl, 2007. "Optimization of surgery sequencing and scheduling decisions under uncertainty," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 13-24, February.
    8. Elena Tànfani & Angela Testi, 2010. "A pre-assignment heuristic algorithm for the Master Surgical Schedule Problem (MSSP)," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 105-119, July.
    9. Cardoen, Brecht & Demeulemeester, Erik & Beliën, Jeroen, 2010. "Operating room planning and scheduling: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(3), pages 921-932, March.
    10. Michael Samudra & Carla Van Riet & Erik Demeulemeester & Brecht Cardoen & Nancy Vansteenkiste & Frank E. Rademakers, 2016. "Scheduling operating rooms: achievements, challenges and pitfalls," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 493-525, October.
    11. Jebali, AIda & Hadj Alouane, Atidel B. & Ladet, Pierre, 2006. "Operating rooms scheduling," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1-2), pages 52-62, February.
    12. Francesca Guerriero & Rosita Guido, 2011. "Operational research in the management of the operating theatre: a survey," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 89-114, March.
    13. Pieter S. Stepaniak & Christiaan Heij & Guus De Vries, 2010. "Modeling and prediction of surgical procedure times," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 64(1), pages 1-18, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sean Harris & David Claudio, 2022. "Current Trends in Operating Room Scheduling 2015 to 2020: a Literature Review," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-42, March.
    2. Guillermo Durán & Mario Guajardo & Facundo Gutiérrez, 2022. "Efficient referee assignment in Argentinean professional basketball leagues using operations research methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(2), pages 1121-1139, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shuwan Zhu & Wenjuan Fan & Shanlin Yang & Jun Pei & Panos M. Pardalos, 2019. "Operating room planning and surgical case scheduling: a review of literature," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 757-805, April.
    2. Aisha Tayyab & Saif Ullah & Mohammed Fazle Baki, 2023. "An Outer Approximation Method for Scheduling Elective Surgeries with Sequence Dependent Setup Times to Multiple Operating Rooms," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Michael Samudra & Carla Van Riet & Erik Demeulemeester & Brecht Cardoen & Nancy Vansteenkiste & Frank E. Rademakers, 2016. "Scheduling operating rooms: achievements, challenges and pitfalls," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 493-525, October.
    4. Marques, Inês & Captivo, M. Eugénia, 2017. "Different stakeholders’ perspectives for a surgical case assignment problem: Deterministic and robust approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(1), pages 260-278.
    5. Aringhieri, Roberto & Duma, Davide & Landa, Paolo & Mancini, Simona, 2022. "Combining workload balance and patient priority maximisation in operating room planning through hierarchical multi-objective optimisation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(2), pages 627-643.
    6. Filippo Visintin & Paola Cappanera & Carlo Banditori, 2016. "Evaluating the impact of flexible practices on the master surgical scheduling process: an empirical analysis," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 182-205, June.
    7. Silva, Thiago A.O. & de Souza, Mauricio C. & Saldanha, Rodney R. & Burke, Edmund K., 2015. "Surgical scheduling with simultaneous employment of specialised human resources," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 719-730.
    8. Cappanera, Paola & Visintin, Filippo & Banditori, Carlo, 2014. "Comparing resource balancing criteria in master surgical scheduling: A combined optimisation-simulation approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 179-196.
    9. Duma, Davide & Aringhieri, Roberto, 2019. "The management of non-elective patients: shared vs. dedicated policies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 199-212.
    10. Azar, Macarena & Carrasco, Rodrigo A. & Mondschein, Susana, 2022. "Dealing with uncertain surgery times in operating room scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(1), pages 377-394.
    11. Thomas Schneider, A.J. & Theresia van Essen, J. & Carlier, Mijke & Hans, Erwin W., 2020. "Scheduling surgery groups considering multiple downstream resources," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 741-752.
    12. Roshanaei, Vahid & Luong, Curtiss & Aleman, Dionne M. & Urbach, David, 2017. "Propagating logic-based Benders’ decomposition approaches for distributed operating room scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(2), pages 439-455.
    13. Silva, Thiago A.O. & de Souza, Mauricio C., 2020. "Surgical scheduling under uncertainty by approximate dynamic programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    14. Roshanaei, Vahid & Luong, Curtiss & Aleman, Dionne M. & Urbach, David R., 2020. "Reformulation, linearization, and decomposition techniques for balanced distributed operating room scheduling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    15. Francesca Guerriero & Rosita Guido, 2011. "Operational research in the management of the operating theatre: a survey," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 89-114, March.
    16. Vijayakumar, Bharathwaj & Parikh, Pratik J. & Scott, Rosalyn & Barnes, April & Gallimore, Jennie, 2013. "A dual bin-packing approach to scheduling surgical cases at a publicly-funded hospital," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(3), pages 583-591.
    17. Sean Harris & David Claudio, 2022. "Current Trends in Operating Room Scheduling 2015 to 2020: a Literature Review," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-42, March.
    18. Morteza Lalmazloumian & M. Fazle Baki & Majid Ahmadi, 2023. "A two-stage stochastic optimization framework to allocate operating room capacity in publicly-funded hospitals under uncertainty," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 238-260, June.
    19. repec:ipg:wpaper:2013-014 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. repec:ipg:wpaper:14 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Gartner, Daniel & Kolisch, Rainer, 2014. "Scheduling the hospital-wide flow of elective patients," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(3), pages 689-699.
    22. Akbarzadeh, Babak & Moslehi, Ghasem & Reisi-Nafchi, Mohammad & Maenhout, Broos, 2019. "The re-planning and scheduling of surgical cases in the operating room department after block release time with resource rescheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(2), pages 596-614.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:286:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-018-3008-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.