IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v14y1966i3p388-397.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Two Scheduling Systems

Author

Listed:
  • A. Soriano

    (Institute for Defense Analyses, Arlington, Virginia)

Abstract

The delays that outpatients have to undergo before getting their medical treatment are often excessively long. The most commonly used patterns of scheduling appointments to patients are classified into three categories: (1) Pure Block Appointment systems, (2) Individual Appointment Systems, and (3) Mixed Block-Individual Appointment Systems. Several analytical studies have been concerned with the comparison of some of these appointment systems, and their highlights are described briefly. There are many other possible ways of assigning appointments to patients; one such way, referred to as the Two-at-a-Time Appointment System, is described. The advantages of the Two-at-a-Time Appointment System over any of the commonly used ones are discussed. Finally, the steady-state waiting time distribution functions that will correspond to the Two-at-a-Time Appointment System and the Individual Appointment System, as applied to the Wilmer Outpatient Clinic, have been obtained and are compared.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Soriano, 1966. "Comparison of Two Scheduling Systems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 388-397, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:14:y:1966:i:3:p:388-397
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.14.3.388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.14.3.388
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.14.3.388?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Paola Cappanera & Filippo Visintin & Carlo Banditori & Daniele Feo, 2019. "Evaluating the long-term effects of appointment scheduling policies in a magnetic resonance imaging setting," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 212-254, March.
    3. Kuiper, Alex & de Mast, Jeroen & Mandjes, Michel, 2021. "The problem of appointment scheduling in outpatient clinics: A multiple case study of clinical practice," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. Marie Matta & Sarah Patterson, 2007. "Evaluating multiple performance measures across several dimensions at a multi-facility outpatient center," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 173-194, June.
    5. Shenghai Zhou & Yichuan Ding & Woonghee Tim Huh & Guohua Wan, 2021. "Constant Job‐Allowance Policies for Appointment Scheduling: Performance Bounds and Numerical Analysis," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(7), pages 2211-2231, July.
    6. Linda V. Green & Sergei Savin & Ben Wang, 2006. "Managing Patient Service in a Diagnostic Medical Facility," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 54(1), pages 11-25, February.
    7. Qingxia Kong & Chung-Yee Lee & Chung-Piaw Teo & Zhichao Zheng, 2013. "Scheduling Arrivals to a Stochastic Service Delivery System Using Copositive Cones," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 711-726, June.
    8. Kum Khiong Yang & Mun Ling Lau & Ser Aik Quek, 1998. "A new appointment rule for a single‐server, multiple‐customer service system," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(3), pages 313-326, April.
    9. Shehadeh, Karmel S. & Cohn, Amy E.M. & Epelman, Marina A., 2019. "Analysis of models for the Stochastic Outpatient Procedure Scheduling Problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(3), pages 721-731.
    10. Tugba Cayirli & Kum Khiong Yang & Ser Aik Quek, 2012. "A Universal Appointment Rule in the Presence of No‐Shows and Walk‐Ins," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 21(4), pages 682-697, July.
    11. Qu, Xiuli & Rardin, Ronald L. & Williams, Julie Ann S. & Willis, Deanna R., 2007. "Matching daily healthcare provider capacity to demand in advanced access scheduling systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(2), pages 812-826, December.
    12. Lawrence W. Robinson & Rachel R. Chen, 2010. "A Comparison of Traditional and Open-Access Policies for Appointment Scheduling," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 330-346, June.
    13. Ho, Chrwan-Jyh & Lau, Hon-Shiang, 1999. "Evaluating the impact of operating conditions on the performance of appointment scheduling rules in service systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 542-553, February.
    14. 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.
    15. Lawrence W. Robinson & Rachel R. Chen, 2011. "Estimating the Implied Value of the Customer's Waiting Time," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 53-57, February.
    16. Oualid Jouini & Saif Benjaafar & Bingnan Lu & Siqiao Li & Benjamin Legros, 2022. "Appointment-driven queueing systems with non-punctual customers," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 101(1), pages 1-56, June.
    17. Soltani, Mohamad & Samorani, Michele & Kolfal, Bora, 2019. "Appointment scheduling with multiple providers and stochastic service times," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 667-683.
    18. Creemers, Stefan & Lambrecht, Marc R. & Beliën, Jeroen & Van den Broeke, Maud, 2021. "Evaluation of appointment scheduling rules: A multi-performance measurement approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    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:inm:oropre:v:14:y:1966:i:3:p:388-397. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.