IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v13y2025i12p1973-d1679450.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Solving Three-Stage Operating Room Scheduling Problems with Uncertain Surgery Durations

Author

Listed:
  • Yang-Kuei Lin

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Systems Management, Feng Chia University, Taichung 407102, Taiwan)

  • Chin Soon Chong

    (Information and Communications Technology (Information Security), Singapore Institute of Technology, 1 Punggol Coast Road, Singapore 828608, Singapore)

Abstract

Operating room (OR) scheduling problems are often addressed using deterministic models that assume surgery durations are known in advance. However, such assumptions fail to reflect the uncertainty that often occurs in real surgical environments, especially during the surgery and recovery stages. This study focuses on a robust scheduling problem involving a three-stage surgical process that includes pre-surgery, surgery, and post-surgery stages. The scheduling needs to coordinate multiple resources—pre-operative holding unit (PHU) beds, ORs, and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) beds—while following a strict no-wait rule to keep patient flow continuous without delays between stages. The main goal is to minimize the makespan and improve schedule robustness when surgery and post-surgery durations are uncertain. To solve this problem, we propose a Genetic Algorithm for Robust Scheduling (GARS), which evaluates solutions using a scenario-based robustness criterion derived from multiple sampled instances. GARS is compared with four other algorithms: a deterministic GA (GAD), a random search (BRS), a greedy randomized insertion and swap heuristic (GRIS), and an improved version of GARS with simulated annealing (GARS_SA). The results from different problem sizes and uncertainty levels show that GARS and GARS_SA consistently perform better than the other algorithms. In large-scale tests with moderate uncertainty (30 surgeries, α = 0.5), GARS achieves an average makespan of 633.85, a standard deviation of 40.81, and a worst-case performance ratio (WPR) of 1.00, while GAD reaches 673.75, 54.21, and 1.11, respectively. GARS can achieve robust performance without using any extra techniques to strengthen the search process. Its structure remains simple and easy to use, making it a practical and effective approach for creating reliable and efficient surgical schedules under uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang-Kuei Lin & Chin Soon Chong, 2025. "Solving Three-Stage Operating Room Scheduling Problems with Uncertain Surgery Durations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:12:p:1973-:d:1679450
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/12/1973/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/12/1973/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brian T. Denton & Andrew J. Miller & Hari J. Balasubramanian & Todd R. Huschka, 2010. "Optimal Allocation of Surgery Blocks to Operating Rooms Under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(4-part-1), pages 802-816, August.
    2. Salma Makboul & Said Kharraja & Abderrahman Abbassi & Ahmed El Hilali Alaoui, 2022. "A two-stage robust optimization approach for the master surgical schedule problem under uncertainty considering downstream resources," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 63-88, March.
    3. Yanbo Ma & Kaiyue Liu & Zheng Li & Xiang Chen, 2022. "Robust Operating Room Scheduling Model with Violation Probability Consideration under Uncertain Surgery Duration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Md Al Amin & Roberto Baldacci & Vahid Kayvanfar, 2025. "A comprehensive review on operating room scheduling and optimization," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 1-30, March.
    6. Wang, Yu & Zhang, Yu & Tang, Jiafu, 2024. "Wasserstein distributionally robust surgery scheduling with elective and emergency patients," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 314(2), pages 509-522.
    7. Jian-Jun Wang & Zongli Dai & Ai-Chih Chang & Jim Junmin Shi, 2022. "Surgical scheduling by Fuzzy model considering inpatient beds shortage under uncertain surgery durations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 463-505, August.
    8. Santos, D. L. & Hunsucker, J. L. & Deal, D. E., 1995. "Global lower bounds for flow shops with multiple processors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 112-120, January.
    9. Yang-Kuei Lin & Yin-Yi Chou, 2020. "A hybrid genetic algorithm for operating room scheduling," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 249-263, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Khaniyev, Taghi & Kayış, Enis & Güllü, Refik, 2020. "Next-day operating room scheduling with uncertain surgery durations: Exact analysis and heuristics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 49-62.
    12. 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.
    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. Yanbo Ma & Kaiyue Liu & Zheng Li & Xiang Chen, 2022. "Robust Operating Room Scheduling Model with Violation Probability Consideration under Uncertain Surgery Duration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Şeyda Gür & Mehmet Pınarbaşı & Hacı Mehmet Alakaş & Tamer Eren, 2023. "Operating room scheduling with surgical team: a new approach with constraint programming and goal programming," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 31(4), pages 1061-1085, December.
    3. Akbarzadeh, Babak & Maenhout, Broos, 2025. "A dedicated branch-price-and-cut algorithm for advance patient planning and surgeon scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 322(2), pages 448-466.
    4. Santos, Daniel & Marques, Inês, 2022. "Designing master surgery schedules with downstream unit integration via stochastic programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(3), pages 834-852.
    5. Seokjun Youn & H. Neil Geismar & Michael Pinedo, 2022. "Planning and scheduling in healthcare for better care coordination: Current understanding, trending topics, and future opportunities," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4407-4423, December.
    6. Makboul, Salma & Olteanu, Alexandru-Liviu & Sevaux, Marc, 2025. "A multiobjective ϵ-constraint based approach for the robust master surgical schedule under multiple uncertainties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 320(3), pages 682-698.
    7. 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.
    8. Tsai, Shing Chih & Yeh, Yingchieh & Kuo, Chen Yun, 2021. "Efficient optimization algorithms for surgical scheduling under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 579-593.
    9. van den Broek d’Obrenan, Anne & Ridder, Ad & Roubos, Dennis & Stougie, Leen, 2020. "Minimizing bed occupancy variance by scheduling patients under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 336-349.
    10. 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.
    11. Gréanne Leeftink & Erwin W. Hans, 2018. "Case mix classification and a benchmark set for surgery scheduling," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 17-33, February.
    12. Zhang, Yu & Wang, Yu & Tang, Jiafu & Lim, Andrew, 2020. "Mitigating overtime risk in tactical surgical scheduling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Marco Caserta & Antonio García Romero, 2024. "A novel approach to forecast surgery durations using machine learning techniques," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 313-327, September.
    16. David D. Cho & Kurt M. Bretthauer & Jan Schoenfelder, 2023. "Patient-to-nurse ratios: Balancing quality, nurse turnover, and cost," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 807-826, December.
    17. Sakine Batun & Brian T. Denton & Todd R. Huschka & Andrew J. Schaefer, 2011. "Operating Room Pooling and Parallel Surgery Processing Under Uncertainty," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 220-237, May.
    18. Silva, Thiago A.O. & de Souza, Mauricio C., 2020. "Surgical scheduling under uncertainty by approximate dynamic programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    19. Anna Livia Croella & Edoardo Maria Tronci & Alberto Nastasi & Laura Palagi & Federico Petitti & Ferdinando Romano, 2025. "Multi-criteria Optimization Scheduling of Surgical Units: A Case Study at Policlinico Umberto I of Rome," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 1-26, June.
    20. Cheng Guo & Merve Bodur & Dionne M. Aleman & David R. Urbach, 2021. "Logic-Based Benders Decomposition and Binary Decision Diagram Based Approaches for Stochastic Distributed Operating Room Scheduling," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1551-1569, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:12:p:1973-:d:1679450. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.