PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10170749

Prioritising waiting lists.

Abstract

The 'top 22' patient conditions on the general surgical waiting list at Guy's Hospital were rated independently by five general surgeons. Each surgeon estimated the peri-operative mortality rates associated with each treatment; the proportion of patients who failed to benefit; the effect of successful treatment on life expectancy and on the patients' quality of life. the mean values were used to estimate the expected net benefits (in terms of quality-adjusted life-years) from treatment one year earlier than might otherwise have been the case. These benefits were then related to the operating times and length of stay associated with each treatment; this identified which treatments offered the greatest benefit per unit of each constrained resource. Of all conditions examined anal fissures where shown to be the least resource intensive in relation to the benefits generated, whilst varicose veins and epigastric hernias proved otherwise. For the full potential of this approach to be realised it needs to be repeated in other places and in other specialties. It nevertheless offers a more rational basis for interpreting waiting list data than presently exists and by using the short-cut methods is a relatively cheap way of generating much useful data.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C Gudex, A Williams, M Jourdan, R Mason, J Maynard, R O'Flynn, M Rendall. 1990. Prioritising waiting lists.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10170749/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Probability estimation when some observations are grouped.

This paper considers the use of additional questions for decreasing survey non-response rates and an approach for estimating a probability based on the results obtained. In a survey, the respondents are asked to answer an original question and follow-up questions, where the answers for the follow-up questions are grouped answers for the original question. For example, respondents are asked to provide an exact number of incidents, but in cases of 'Do not know' or 'Refuse' responses, they are subsequently asked to pick an answer from a less specific categorical scale. The new estimator obtains smaller variance asymptotically and does not depend on a distribution family. This method is applied to income questions in a survey regarding injury prevention and behaviours. Another application is survey data on intimate partner violence, where some amendments were applied for incorporating post-stratification weights and for using non-random grouping. For additional illustration, an example of parameter estimation on artificially generated data is presented.

Data Collection↗