Table 3. Operational Outcomesa.
| Metric | Control (n = 356) | Intervention (n = 327) | Improvement, % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accurate within 60 min, No./total No. (%) | |||
| Overall | 236/356 (66.3) | 244/327 (74.6) | 8.3 |
| Colorectal Service | 72/119 (60.5) | 72/97 (74.2) | 13.7 |
| Gynecology Service | 164/237 (69.2) | 172/230 (74.8) | 5.6 |
| Patient wait time, mean (SD), minb | |||
| Overall | 49.4 (70.6) | 16.3 (74.6) | 67.1 |
| Colorectal Service | 70.2 (72.5) | 7.8 (82.3) | 88.9 |
| Gynecology Service | 36.9 (66.8) | 20.2 (70.8) | 45.3 |
| Turnover time, mean (SD), minb | |||
| Overall | 70.6 (35.3) | 69.1 (42.1) | 2.0 |
| Colorectal Service | 74.4 (36.6) | 74.4 (32.6) | −0.1 |
| Gynecology Service | 68.3 (66.7) | 66.7 (45.8) | 2.4 |
| Patient time in facility (until toes-in time), mean (SD), minc | |||
| Overall | 173.3 (78.6) | 148.1 (62.3) | 14.5 |
| Colorectal Service | 177.1 (75.4) | 146.0 (52.2) | 17.6 |
| Gynecology Service | 171.0 (80.8) | 149.0 (66.6) | 12.9 |
Sample sizes for service-specific results are listed in Table 1.
Sample sizes for patient wait time and turnover time: 91 first cases in the Colorectal Service with a to-follow case (47.3% in the intervention arm); 172 first cases in the Gynecology Service with a to-follow case (53.5% in the intervention arm). Turnover time did not exclude durations greater than a set threshold, nor did we exclude instances in which the following case in a room was performed by a different surgeon, as is common for turnover metrics, making the mean time between cases appear shorter.
Five to-follow cases had a missing time stamp for patient time in facility: 2 in the intervention arm and 2 in the control arm in the Colorectal Service and 1 in the intervention arm in the Gynecology Service.