Skip to main content
The British Journal of Ophthalmology logoLink to The British Journal of Ophthalmology
. 2001 May;85(5):582–585. doi: 10.1136/bjo.85.5.582

Computer modelling of a cataract waiting list

S Tuft 1, S Gallivan 1
PMCID: PMC1723981  PMID: 11316721

Abstract

AIM—To compare three different strategies for determining admission dates for patients awaiting cataract extraction after scoring for visual impairment.
METHODS—357 patients attending for assessment for cataract surgery were scored for visual impairment. These scores were used as a basis for ranking patients into three impairment strata. A computer simulation was used to compare 3 years' operation of different admission strategies—a first come first served booking system, a triage booking system, and a waiting list system in which admissions were strictly ordered according to priority stratum. Differences in priority weighted delays before treatment were analysed.
RESULTS—Both the triage system and the priority based waiting list system gave considerable reduction in priority weighted delay compared with a first come first served admission policy. The percentage reduction achieved (30%-60%) is strongly influenced by the number of weeks fully booked when the booking systems are introduced. The priority weighted delay of the triage system, where booking decisions were made at the time of the outpatient assessment, was consistently and substantially outperformed by the priority based waiting list system where the decision to allocate an admission date was delayed as long as possible.
CONCLUSIONS—There is considerable scope for reducing delays to high priority patients if simple rules are used to determine admission dates. Using these rules, booking patients at the time of the outpatient assessment gives substantially less benefit in terms of reducing delays to high priority patients than if the decision about the admission date is deferred.



Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (110.8 KB).

Figure 1  .

Figure 1  

The operation of the triage priority booking system, allocating patients to different booking zones according to their priority score.

Figure 2  .

Figure 2  

Distribution of the visual impairment scores.

Figure 3  .

Figure 3  

Comparison of total priority weighted delay incurred over 3 years of operation of the treatment scheduling systems. Curves represent best fit quadratics through clusters of 10 points each representing an independent simulation.

Figure 4  .

Figure 4  

Percentage reduction in priority weighted delay in comparison with first come first served booking system. Each point represents 3 years' operation of the system for different periods fully booked at the initiation of the simulation.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aylward G., Larkin D., Cooling R. Audit of cost and clinical outcome of cataract surgery. Health Trends. 1993;25(4):126–129. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Desai P., Minassian D. C., Reidy A. National cataract surgery survey 1997-8: a report of the results of the clinical outcomes. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999 Dec;83(12):1336–1340. doi: 10.1136/bjo.83.12.1336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Desai P., Reidy A., Minassian D. C. Profile of patients presenting for cataract surgery in the UK: national data collection. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999 Aug;83(8):893–896. doi: 10.1136/bjo.83.8.893. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hadorn D. C., Holmes A. C. The New Zealand priority criteria project. Part 1: Overview. BMJ. 1997 Jan 11;314(7074):131–134. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7074.131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Javitt J. C., Brenner M. H., Curbow B., Legro M. W., Street D. A. Outcomes of cataract surgery. Improvement in visual acuity and subjective visual function after surgery in the first, second, and both eyes. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993 May;111(5):686–691. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1993.01090050120041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Laidlaw D. A., Harrad R. A., Hopper C. D., Whitaker A., Donovan J. L., Brookes S. T., Marsh G. W., Peters T. J., Sparrow J. M., Frankel S. J. Randomised trial of effectiveness of second eye cataract surgery. Lancet. 1998 Sep 19;352(9132):925–929. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(97)12536-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Minassian D. C., Reidy A., Desai P., Farrow S., Vafidis G., Minassian A. The deficit in cataract surgery in England and Wales and the escalating problem of visual impairment: epidemiological modelling of the population dynamics of cataract. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000 Jan;84(1):4–8. doi: 10.1136/bjo.84.1.4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Percival S. P., Setty S. S. Prospective audit comparing ambulatory day surgery with inpatient surgery for treating cataracts. Qual Health Care. 1992 Mar;1(1):38–42. doi: 10.1136/qshc.1.1.38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Reidy A., Minassian D. C., Vafidis G., Joseph J., Farrow S., Wu J., Desai P., Connolly A. Prevalence of serious eye disease and visual impairment in a north London population: population based, cross sectional study. BMJ. 1998 May 30;316(7145):1643–1646. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7145.1643. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Steinberg E. P., Tielsch J. M., Schein O. D., Javitt J. C., Sharkey P., Cassard S. D., Legro M. W., Diener-West M., Bass E. B., Damiano A. M. The VF-14. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994 May;112(5):630–638. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1994.01090170074026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Taylor H. R. Cataract: how much surgery do we have to do? Br J Ophthalmol. 2000 Jan;84(1):1–2. doi: 10.1136/bjo.84.1.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Wormald R. P., Wright L. A., Courtney P., Beaumont B., Haines A. P. Visual problems in the elderly population and implications for services. BMJ. 1992 May 9;304(6836):1226–1229. doi: 10.1136/bmj.304.6836.1226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of Ophthalmology are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES