Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Machine Learning Can Improve Estimation of Surgical Case Duration: A Pilot Study

  • Systems-Level Quality Improvement
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Operating room (OR) utilization is a significant determinant of hospital profitability. One aspect of this is surgical scheduling, which depends on accurate predictions of case duration. This has been done historically by either the surgeon based on personal experience, or by an electronic health record (EHR) based on averaged historical means for case duration. Here, we compare the predicted case duration (pCD) accuracy of a novel machine-learning algorithm over a 3-month period. A proprietary machine learning algorithm was applied utilizing operating room factors such as patient demographic data, pre-surgical milestones, and hospital logistics and compared to that of a conventional EHR. Actual case duration and pCD (Leap Rail vs EHR) was obtained at one institution over the span of 3 months. Actual case duration was defined as time between patient entry into an OR and time of exit. pCD was defined as case time allotted by either Leap Rail or EHR. Cases where Leap Rail was unable to generate a pCD were excluded. A total of 1059 surgical cases were performed during the study period, with 990 cases being eligible for the study. Over all sub-specialties, Leap Rail showed a 7 min improvement in absolute difference between pCD and actual case duration when compared to conventional EHR (p < 0.0001). In aggregate, the Leap Rail method resulted in a 70% reduction in overall scheduling inaccuracy. Machine-learning algorithms are a promising method of increasing pCD accuracy and represent one means of improving OR planning and efficiency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gordon, T., Paul, S., Lyles, A., and Fountain, J., Surgical unit time utilization review: Resource utilization and management implications. J. Med. Syst. 12(3):169–179, 1988.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Peltokorpi, A., How do strategic decisions and operative practices affect operating room productivity? Health Care Manag. Sci. 14(4):370–382, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gabriel, R. A., Wu, A., Huang, C. C., Dutton, R. P., and Urman, R. D., National incidences and predictors of inefficiencies in perioperative care. J. Clin. Anesth. 31:238–246, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. May, J. H., Spangler, W. E., Strum, D. P., and Vargas, L. G., The surgical scheduling problem: Current research and future opportunities. Prod. Oper. Manag. 20(3):392–405, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tankard, K., Acciavatti, T. D., Vacanti, J. C. et al., Contributors to operating room underutilization and implications for hospital administrators. Health Care Manag. (Frederick). 37(2):118–128, 2018.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Laskin, D. M., Abubaker, A. O., and Strauss, R. A., Accuracy of predicting the duration of a surgical operation. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 71(2):446–447, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wu, A., Huang, C. C., Weaver, M. J., and Urman, R. D., Use of historical surgical times to predict duration of primary Total knee arthroplasty. J. Arthroplasty. 31(12):2768–2772, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Stepaniak, P. S., Heij, C., Mannaerts, G. H., De quelerij, M., and De vries, G., Modeling procedure and surgical times for current procedural terminology-anesthesia-surgeon combinations and evaluation in terms of case-duration prediction and operating room efficiency: A multicenter study. Anesth. Analg. 109(4):1232–1245, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Eijkemans, M. J., Van houdenhoven, M., Nguyen, T., Boersma, E., Steyerberg, E. W., and Kazemier, G., Predicting the unpredictable: A new prediction model for operating room times using individual characteristics and the surgeon's estimate. Anesthesiology. 112(1):41–49, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bishop, C., Pattern recognition and machine learning. Berlin: Springer, 2006, ISBN 0-387-31073-8.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mason, L., Baxter, J. Bartlett, P. L., and Frean, M., Boosting algorithms as gradient descent. In S.A. Solla and T.K. Leen and K. Müller. Advances in neural information processing systems 12. MIT Press. 512–518, 1999.

  12. Rokach, Lior, and Maimon, O., Data mining with decision trees: Theory and applications. World Scientific Pub Co Inc. ISBN 978-9812771711, 2008.

  13. Breiman, L. Machine Learning 45: 5, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324.

  14. Russell, S. J., and Norvig, P., Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Pearson, 2016.

  15. Dexter, F., and Macario, A., Decrease in case duration required to complete an additional case during regularly scheduled hours in an operating room suite: A computer simulation study. Anesth. Analg. 88(1):72–76, 1999.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Macario, A., What does one minute of operating room time cost? J. Clin. Anesth. 22(4):233–236, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Van Houdenhoven, M., Van oostrum, J. M., Hans, E. W., Wullink, G., and Kazemier, G., Improving operating room efficiency by applying bin-packing and portfolio techniques to surgical case scheduling. Anesth. Analg. 105(3):707–714, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dexter, F., and Traub, R. D., How to schedule elective surgical cases into specific operating rooms to maximize the efficiency of use of operating room time. Anesth. Analg. 94(4):933–942, 2002 table of contents.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dexter, F., and Ledolter, J., Bayesian prediction bounds and comparisons of operating room times even for procedures with few or no historic data. Anesthesiology. 103(6):1259–1167, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None. Data were provided by Leap Rail, Inc.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Justin P. Tuwatananurak, Xinling Xu, Joshua A. Vacanti & Richard D. Urman

  2. Leap Rail Inc, Houston, TX, USA

    Shayan Zadeh

  3. NorthBay Healthcare, Fairfield, CA, USA

    William R. Fulton

  4. Department of Anesthesiology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA

    Jesse M. Ehrenfeld

  5. Center for Perioperative Research, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Richard D. Urman

Authors
  1. Justin P. Tuwatananurak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shayan Zadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xinling Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joshua A. Vacanti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. William R. Fulton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jesse M. Ehrenfeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Richard D. Urman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard D. Urman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Justin P. Tuwatananurak declares that he has no conflict of interest. Shayan Zadeh serves as the CEO of Leap Rail, Inc. Xinling Xu PhD declares that she has no conflict of interest. Joshua A. Vacanti declares that he has no conflict of interest. William R. Fulton declares that he has no conflict of interest. Jesse M. Ehrenfeld declares that he has no conflict of interest. Richard D. Urman has received funding from Medtronic, Merck and Mallinckrodt for unrelated research and honorarium from 3 M and Posimir.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent requirement was waived given the deidentified nature of the data and observational nature of the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Systems-Level Quality Improvement

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tuwatananurak, J.P., Zadeh, S., Xu, X. et al. Machine Learning Can Improve Estimation of Surgical Case Duration: A Pilot Study. J Med Syst 43, 44 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-019-1160-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-019-1160-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation