delays and waiting in healthcare
DESCRIPTION
Delays and Waiting in Healthcare. Queueing Systems in Healthcare. Many healthcare related systems have important queueing subsystems that must be managed ED and OB are important customer entry and contact points for hospitals - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Delays and Waiting in Healthcare
Queueing Systems in Healthcare• Many healthcare related systems have important queueing
subsystems that must be managed– ED and OB are important customer entry and contact points for hospitals– call centers such as centralized appt scheduling, Dial-a-Nurse, main
hospital operators, physician referral are all important customer contact points
– access to clinic appointments, surgical schedules, therapeutic and diagnostic equipment is important dimension of patient satisfaction
– turnaround times of ancillary services such as lab, pharmacy, radiology, transcription can affect inpatient length of stay and outpatient satisfaction
– cost of capacity in terms of staff must be minimized while still meeting service level targets related to waiting
• Institute of Medicine in “Crossing the Quality Chasm” has identified “timeliness” as a major area for improvement in hour healthcare system
Wait Register Complete HHQ WaitStart/ntrVitals/
AssessmentWait
ProviderContactExam
WaitDiagnostic/Intervention
WaitProviderContact/Results
Wait Discharge
CollectionsMCHC
PharmacyWait
Leave
OutsidePharmacy
Wait
Start/Enter
Finish
An Urgent Care Clinic
Patients visit a series of queueing systems in series
The Registration Queue
Wait RegisterStart/Enter
• Random arrivals
• Average arrival rate depends on time of day and day of week
• # of registration staff varies by TOD/DOW
• The amount of time it takes to register varies from patient to patient
• Patient waits for next available registration staff
• Long delays may cause patient to “balk” or “renege”
• FCFS and/or priority queueing discipline
• Wait times play major role as customer dissatisfier
BalkRenege
Essential Features of Queuing Systems
DepartureQueue
discipline
Arrival process
Queueconfiguration
ServiceProcess
& capacity
Renege
Balk
Callingpopulation
No futureneed for service
0
10
20
30
40
50
15 30 45 60 75 90
Upper end of category
Freq
uenc
y
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
15 30 45 60 75 90
Upper end of category
Freq
uenc
y
Interarrival time distribution Service time distribution
Important Definitions and Relationships
• a=avg arrival rate (customers/hour)• b=avg service time (hours/customer)• c=# of servers
= avg server utilization
1ab
c for queue to be stable
Coefficient of Variation (C)• Coefficient of variation applies to probability
distributions and gives a sense of the magnitude of variability in the distribution
• It’s just the ratio of the standard deviation and the mean
C
Distribution Mean (m) Std Dev (s) CConstant 0 0Exponential 1Normal 10 2 0.2
Corrupting Influence of Variability
• Queues form due to variability in– time between arrivals– duration of service process– along with lack of synchronization between arrivals and service
• Queues also form due to highly utilized capacity subject to random demands for service
• Reducing variability in arrival and/or service process tends to improve performance.
• Since service cannot be provided from “stock”, safety capacity must be provided to cover for variability.
• Tradeoff is between cost of waiting, lost revenue, and cost of capacity.
• Pooling servers improves performance.– large pools of servers (staff, beds, etc.) can run at higher utilization levels than smaller
pools for the SAME level of customer service
• Subsystems with a queueing component must be treated appropriately in the broader context of staffing
– i.e. you can’t just add up the average work and divide by the available staff hours
(1) WhyQueue.xls(2) SimpleClinic.igx
Many Managerial Responsibilities and Levers
• The Input Stream (IHI Concepts 12-20, MBPF Ch 8, 10)– predicting and shaping demand
• The Waiting Experience (MBPF Ch 8)– where, what happens, how long, value?– Psychology of waiting
• The Service Experience (IHI Concepts 1-11)– designing processes and systems
• The Capacity (IHI Concepts 21-27, MBPF Ch 8)– matching capacity to demand
• Overall System Performance (IHI, MBPF Ch 8)– cost– customer wait, satisfaction, and outcomes
IHI = Reducing Delays and Waiting Times book, MBPF = Anupindi book
Many Challenges in Managing Queueing Systems in Healthcare
• The Input Stream (IHI Concepts 12-20, MBPF Ch 8)
– often demand difficult to predict or to influence– different urgency levels of demand
• The Waiting Experience (MBPF Ch 8)
– waits in healthcare are rampant, patients compare waits when possible, waiting areas often unpleasant, lost demand, suboptimal care
• The Service Experience (IHI Concepts 1-11)
– patient participates in the process– complex technology and highly variable processes– potential for tragic consequences
• The Capacity (IHI Concepts 21-27, MBPF Ch 8)
– TOD/DOW fluctuations in demand make matching capacity difficult– often labor is specialized, expensive and highly skilled– cost of insufficient capacity can be very high
• Overall System Performance (IHI, FF MBPF Ch 8)
– difficult tradeoffs between capacity cost, patient wait and satisfaction, and patient outcomes
– waits and delays are often highly visible to patients, staff, the public
Queueing Models• Given assumptions about system inputs
– arrival patterns (distribution of time between arrivals)– service time distribution– number of servers (beds, staff, machines)– service discipline (FCFS, priority)
• Mathematical models that allow us to predict system performance measures such as:– probability of waiting to be served– average time spent waiting– server (e.g. bed or staff) utilization
• Unlike simple Poisson occupancy model, queueing models let us model explicit consequences of not having enough capacity
• Some queueing models are “simple”, others are horribly complex
The Single Server Queue
Customers in Queue
Server
Applications?
M/M/1 queueing system
Example_7-11.xls
Elements of Queueing Systems• Arrival processes
– interarrival time distribution• fixed – appointment like• exponential – random arrivals
– single vs batch arrivals• patients• patients with families (waiting room sizing)
– single or multiple classes of customers• patient types, acuity levels, demand types
• Service Process– service time distribution– how many servers?
• staffing level
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
15 30 45 60 75 90
Upper end of category
Freq
uenc
y
0
10
20
30
40
50
15 30 45 60 75 90
Upper end of category
Freq
uenc
y
Elements of Queueing Systems• Service Discipline
– first come first served (FIFO)– last come first served (LIFO)– priority service (triage)– served in random order – balking, reneging, jockeying (real life)
• Service and Queue configuration– single stage– queues in parallel– queues in series – queueing network
patient works his/her waythrough various ancillarydepartments
Ironic email from some hospitalReceived Days Before Session on Queueing Models
How are you??? Life here at Hospital X is OK. We have had a few changes within the department and a few leadership changes in the System recently... BLAH BLAH … Personal update … BLAH BLAH I actually do have a work related question for you (hopefully you don't mind!!)...I assume you recall the phone model you completed for us...is it possible to use that same model (either as is or with a few tweaks) to look at CSR staffing at the front desks? A co-worker and I are looking for a way to get decent numbers for both the phone rooms and the front desk personnel and believe this kind of a model (we don't know if this exact one would work) may give us our best answer. What do you think??
A Capacity Planning Workhorse: The M/M/c queue “How Many Beds?” – Green (2003)
Servers (Beds)Patients in Queue
The M/M/c/infinity Model
randomarrivals
LOS assumedto be exponentially
distributed
cbeds
unlimitedwaitingspace
Q’ng model shorthand
Random Arrivals
arrivals / service time / # servers / # servers + Q size
Sidebar: Data
collection in clinics
Excel based manual logs
Infrared tracking system
Process Time Distributions in a Primary Care Clinic
Time In Vital Signs Area
711
842
1361
1604
834
380
235
102 73 48135
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
0 to
0.9
1 to
1.9
2 to
2.9
3 to
3.9
4 to
4.9
5 to
5.9
6 to
6.9
7 to
7.9
8 to
8.9
9 to
9.9
10+
Duration in Minutes
Nu
mb
er o
f P
atie
nts
Exam Duration
685
898
569
267
9649 21 14 7 6 2 1 4
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 to
4.9
5 to
9.9
10 to
14.
9
15 to
19.
9
20 to
24.
9
25 to
29.
9
30 to
34.
9
35 to
39.
9
40 to
44.
9
45 to
49.
9
50 to
54.
9
55 to
59.
9
60+
Duration in Minutes
Nu
mb
er o
f P
atie
nts
Provider Documentation Time
605
296
168 157113
77 67 56 43 31 28 32 18 20 10 13 5 8 5 544
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 to
0.9
1 to
1.9
2 to
2.9
3 to
3.9
4 to
4.9
5 to
5.9
6 to
6.9
7 to
7.9
8 to
8.9
9 to
9.9
10 to
10.
9
11 to
11.
9
12 to
12.
9
13 to
13.
9
14 to
14.
9
15 to
15.
9
16 to
16.
9
17 to
17.
9
18 to
18.
9
19 to
19.
9
20+
Duration in Minutes
Nu
mb
er o
f P
atie
nts
Post Exam Wait Time
481
319
388
450
369
260
191
141107
78 8054 47 41 28 25 24 15 7 8
50
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0 to
4.9
9
5 to
9.9
9
10 to
14.
9
15 to
19.
9
20 to
24.
9
25 to
29.
9
30 to
34.
9
35 to
39.
9
40 to
44.
9
45 to
49.
9
50 to
54.
9
55 to
59.
9
60 to
64.
9
65 to
69.
9
70 to
74.
9
75 to
79.
9
80 to
84.
9
85 to
89.
9
90 to
94.
9
95 to
99.
9
100+
Duration in Minutes
Nu
mb
er o
f P
atie
nts
Ward, T.J., Isken, M.W., and Minds, D. (2003) Automated Data Collection in a Primary Care Clinic , INFORMS Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA.
M/M/c Basics - MMs-Template-HCM540.xls
Parameter Units SymbolPatient Arrival Rate pats/min aAvg Registration time min/pat b# of Reg Staff staff c
Mathematical equations
(2) Queueing Model(s)(1) Inputs
(3) Outputs or Performance Measures Formula
Utilization = c
ab
Probability of Waiting in Queue (pn=probability of n patients in the
system) Dp =
1
0
1c
nnp
Expected Wait Time in Queue QW =
b
cpD
)1(
Probability of Waiting in Queue less than t mins
t
QWP = t
b
c
eD
p)1(
Call Center “What if” Examples1. Given a=40 calls/hr, b=15 mins/call and c=12
customer service representatives (CSR), what is the expected time customers will spend on hold (E[Wq]) ? What percentage will wait at all?
2. What is the % utilization for the servers?
3. If a increases to 45 calls/hr, how will E[Wq] and the percentage that wait change?
4. If a increases to 45 calls/hr but we can decrease b to 12 mins/call, how does E[Wq] change?
5. For a=45 and b=12, how much can we reduce c (# of staff) down to before E[Wq] exceeds 5 minutes?
MMS-Template-HCM540.xls
PhoneModel-HCM540.xls
Based on actual model used in practice. Day is
divided up into hours and arrival rates and staffing can differ by
hour.
A simple template for exploring various wait time
performance measures for a given arrival rate, mean
service time and # of servers.
Relationship Between Utilization, Capacity and Overflow Probability or Wait Time in Queue
• Economies of scale – larger server pools can run at higher utilizations for given service level
• Non-linear increase in overflow or waiting as capacity utilization approaches 100%
• Decreasing marginal return of adding capacity
Utilization and Economies of ScaleAvg Wait in Queue - Numer of Server Effect
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 0.99
Server Utilization
Avg
Tim
e i
n Q
ueu
e
1
2
3
4
5
10
50
100
Number of ServersNotice that for the same utilization, more servers leads to a smaller average number in queue. This is an example of risk, or variance, pooling. Large server pools can operate at very high utilization levels while still meeting service level objectives. Small pools must operate at lower utilization levels to meet similar service level goals. This is why organizations create large centralized call centers.
Decreasing Marginal Improvements of Additional Capacity
121314151617
Avg Wait Time in Queue(a=4.5 customers per hour, b=1 hour)
0.0000
0.2000
0.4000
0.6000
0.8000
1.0000
1.2000
1.4000
1.6000
1.8000
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Number of Staff
Av
g T
ime
in
Qu
eu
e (
ho
urs
)
Avg Wait
When adding servers to a system (while holding arrival rate and service time fixed) you get decreasing absolute returns. You get a big improvement with the addition of the first server, and each additional server buys you an ever decreasing level of improvement. Obviously, you eventually drive the average wait time in queue to 0 and no more improvement is possible.
Queuing can fool your intuitionState Unemployment Office - Processing application forms for new companies
InputsBase worker processing rate 4 forms per week
1992 1993 % IncreaseForm arrival rate (per week) 1.80 3.90 117%Average Delay (weeks) 0.45 5.00 1011%
OutputsWorker Utilization 45% 98%
Predicted average forms in queue 0.37 38.03Predicted average time in queue (weeks) 0.20 9.75Predicted average time in system (weeks) 0.45 10.00
Implied worker processing rate 4.00 4.10Delay at implied rate 0.45 5.00
Mark Isken:YOWZA, asking for trouble!
Mark Isken:So, the worker must have actually been working harder than before to keep the backlog at 5! See D19 for actual implied service rate.
The employee was fired due to this increase in delay time. He sued and court ruled company was justified since demand doubled and so, the delay time should have only doubled as well.
IHI Change Concepts: Shaping Demand(see Breakthrough Guide for details)
• Eliminate things that aren’t used– Standard drug formularies
• Insert an “informative delay”– Patient education during waits
• Combine services– Group appointments
• Standardize and automate– Telephone or internet based FAQs
• Triage– “express” system within ED for simple problems
IHI Change Concepts: Shaping Demand
• Extinguish demand for ineffective care– Evidence based medicine
• Relocate the demand– Immunizations at school
• Anticipate demand– Planning for post-discharge care
• Promote self-care– Diagnostic testing at home
IHI Change Concepts: Matching Capacity to Demand
• Improve predictions– Analysis of historical
data (e.g. Hillmaker)– explanatory models
• Smooth the work flow– Appointment scheduling– inform patients of
current wait times
• Adjust to peak demand– Flexible staff scheduling – “open access” in clinics
• Identify and manage the constraint– Provider, support staff, or
exam rooms? • Work down the backlog
– Preparing for “open access” by increasing capacity in the short term
• Balance centralized and decentralized capacity– Staffing pools
• Use contingency plans– What can be done to cope
with short term demand spikes?
Staffing a Centralized Appointment Scheduling System in Lourdes Hospital
• Very nice application of a simple queueing model to appt center staffing
• Advantages of centralized scheduling?• Service dissatisfiers? Impacts?• Prior emphasis on “high staff utilization” was the wrong goal• Well accepted approach of using M/M/c queueing model with time
of day specific arrival rates– found service time were NOT exponential but that M/M/c worked very
well anyway (insensitive to actual distribution of call time)
• Created staffing tables to facilitate managerial use (see Table 2)• Used heuristic (common sense and trial and error) approach to
adjust staff schedules to implement new staffing patterns with no staff adds
Interfaces 21:5 Sept-Oct 1991 (pp. 1-11) See WebCT