IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v38y2021i1p61-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can a system dynamics model of the emergency department show which levers reduce bottlenecks and delays to improve access to care?

Author

Listed:
  • Sue McAvoy
  • Andrew Staib
  • Gregory Treston

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate through practical application how a system dynamics (SD) patient flow model of an emergency department (ED) can show which levers effectively reduce backlogs to improve access to care. Overcrowded EDs are struggling to meet demand and access targets. In 2016 and 2017, in the UK and Australia, respectively, 15% and 28% of arrivals waited longer than the targeted 4‐hr treatment time. Historically, simulation models that have informed access to emergency care have ignored the wider systems impacts. There is a growing awareness of the value of systems analysis tools for informing interventions and policy. In this study, we constructed a pilot system dynamics patient flow model, where the scope was the ambulatory and ambulance patient arrivals, the ED processes for acute and fast‐track pathways, pathology and radiology services, the ED short‐stay unit, and the Medical Assessment Planning Inpatient Unit. Patients queued to access constrained ED resources (doctors and beds) and diagnostic services (pathology and X‐ray). The model was tested on actual data from five separate historical periods spanning 3 years. The resultant daily pattern of peaks and troughs in patient flow and system delays accurately replicated patterns in actual patient flows, resource use, and the location of delays. “What if” scenario analysis (b) simulated how access would have looked in the sample weeks with different intervention strategies, (b) simulated system limits on the basis of current resources, (c) accurately identified levers that historically have been most effective at minimizing ambulance ramping, and (d) identified when additional staffing would fail to improve flow.

Suggested Citation

  • Sue McAvoy & Andrew Staib & Gregory Treston, 2021. "Can a system dynamics model of the emergency department show which levers reduce bottlenecks and delays to improve access to care?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 61-79, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:38:y:2021:i:1:p:61-79
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2663
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2663
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2663?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barry Richmond, 1993. "Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 113-133, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Khalid Saeed, 2014. "Jay Forrester's operational approach to economics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(4), pages 233-261, October.
    2. Jagustović, Renata & Zougmoré, Robert B. & Kessler, Aad & Ritsema, Coen J. & Keesstra, Saskia & Reynolds, Martin, 2019. "Contribution of systems thinking and complex adaptive system attributes to sustainable food production: Example from a climate-smart village," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 65-75.
    3. Yun Eui Choi & Kihwan Song & Min Kim & Junga Lee, 2017. "Transformation Planning for Resilient Wildlife Habitats in Ecotourism Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-28, March.
    4. Gürsan, C. & de Gooyert, V., 2021. "The systemic impact of a transition fuel: Does natural gas help or hinder the energy transition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    5. K. Lawler & T. Vlasova & A. Moscardini, 2019. "Using System Dynamics in Macroeconomics," Вестник Киевского национального университета имени Тараса Шевченко. Экономика., Socionet;Киевский национальный университет имени Тараса Шевченко, vol. 3(204), pages 34-40.
    6. Piero Mella & Michela Pellicelli, 2017. "How Myopia Archetypes Lead to Non-Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-24, December.
    7. Estee Vermeulen-Miltz & Jai Kumar Clifford-Holmes & Amanda Talita Lombard & Bernadette Snow, 2023. "Coastal Tourism Recovery amid COVID-19: Insights from a Participatory System Dynamics Approach," Tourism and Hospitality, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-16, July.
    8. Bucaro, Anthony C., 2019. "Enhancing auditors' critical thinking in audits of complex estimates," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 35-49.
    9. Fernandes, Aline R. & da Silva, Carlos Arthur B., 2017. "Ten Years later: A Comparison of Results of Simulation Scenarios under a Systems Dynamic Approach and the Actual Economic Performance of Small-Scale Agro-industries Supported by Brazilian Agro-industr," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 8(2), March.
    10. Heidi L. Davidz & Deborah J. Nightingale, 2008. "Enabling systems thinking to accelerate the development of senior systems engineers," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, March.
    11. Kwamina Ewur Banson & Daniel Kwasi Asare & Fidelis Doodaa Dery & Kwadwo Boakye & Akudugu Boniface & Moses Asamoah & Lourees Esi Awotwe, 2020. "Impact of Fall Armyworm on Farmer’s Maize: Systemic Approach," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 237-264, April.
    12. Linlin Wang & Rongchang Wang & Haiyan Yan, 2021. "System-Dynamics Modeling for Exploring the Impact of Industrial-Structure Adjustment on the Water Quality of the River Network in the Yangtze Delta Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    13. Crystle J. Kelly & James Rogers & Edward J. Gallaher, 2021. "Insights from system dynamics that support experimental research: an exemplar of the NMDA receptor," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(2-3), pages 197-211, April.
    14. Thomas Grisold & Markus F. Peschl, 2017. "Why a Systems Thinking Perspective on Cognition Matters for Innovation and Knowledge Creation. A Framework towards Leaving behind Our Projections from the Past for Creating New Futures," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 335-353, May.
    15. Martin F. G. Schaffernicht & Stefan N. Groesser, 2016. "A competence development framework for learning and teaching system dynamics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(1), pages 52-81, January.
    16. Camilo Olaya, 2015. "Cows, agency, and the significance of operational thinking," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 31(4), pages 183-219, October.
    17. Paul H. Thibodeau & Cynthia McPherson Frantz & Mirella L. Stroink, 2016. "Situating a Measure of Systems Thinking in a Landscape of Psychological Constructs," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 753-769, November.
    18. Gohari, Alireza & Savari, Peyman & Eslamian, Saeid & Etemadi, Nematollah & Keilmann-Gondhalekar, Daphne, 2022. "Developing a system dynamic plus framework for water-land-society nexus modeling within urban socio-hydrologic systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    19. Gattie, David K. & Kellam, Nadia N. & Turk, H. Jeff, 2007. "Informing ecological engineering through ecological network analysis, ecological modelling, and concepts of systems and engineering ecology," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 208(1), pages 25-40.
    20. Annik Magerholm Fet & Haley Knudson, 2021. "An Approach to Sustainability Management across Systemic Levels: The Capacity-Building in Sustainability and Environmental Management Model (CapSEM-Model)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:srbeha:v:38:y:2021:i:1:p:61-79. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    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.