Search

Background: Little is known about the existing structure and function of referral networks in the prevalent referral system for specialized surgical care in Canada, which is based on direct physician referral to specialists in a largely unmanaged referral marketplace. Our objective was to describe and analyze the referral networks of referring physicians and surgeons for common surgical procedures in Ontario, to better understand potential barriers to single-entry models., Methods: We analyzed referral networks for patients between referring physicians and surgeons for 9 common scheduled surgical procedures from 2016 to 2019 using administrative data sources in Ontario. We described the connectedness of referring physician-surgeon pairs using descriptive measures and graphical social network analysis., Results: The median number of surgeons connected to a referring physician for patients having a particular surgical procedure ranged from 1 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-3) for spine surgery to 3 (IQR 1-4) for knee arthroplasty and 3 (IQR 2-5) for noncancer uterine procedures. Referral network structure varied according to the procedure studied. Spine surgery was highly clustered with a small number of larger groups; gallbladder, inguinal hernia, and noncancer uterine surgery were highly distributed with many small groups within the referral network. Breast cancer surgery occurred in a largely distributed network, but with a skewed distribution reflecting a few small groups with large numbers of patients., Conclusion: Improving surgical wait times by coordinating surgical referrals will require approaches that address the structure of existing referral networks. Most physicians refer their patients to a very small number of surgeons, suggesting that referring physicians largely do not individualize referrals to multiple different surgeons based on specific patient characteristics., Competing Interests: Competing interests:: Dionne Aleman reports research student funding from the Women’s College Hospital. Jonathan Irish reports leadership positions with the Canadian Cancer Society (board member, unpaid) and Cancer Care Ontario–Ontario Health (vice-president, clinical; paid). No other competing interests were declared., (© 2024 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors.)

Background: Canadian health systems fare poorly in providing timely access to elective surgical care, which is crucial for quality, trust, and satisfaction., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of surgical wait times for adults receiving non-urgent cataract surgery, knee arthroplasty, hip arthroplasty, gallbladder surgery, and non-cancer uterine surgery in Ontario, Canada, between 2013 and 2019. We obtained data from the Wait Times Information System (WTIS) database. Inter- and intra-hospital and surgeon variations in wait time were described graphically with caterpillar plots. We used non-nested 3-level hierarchical random effects models to estimate variation partition coefficients, quantifying the proportion of wait time variance attributable to surgeons and hospitals., Results: A total of 942,605 procedures at 107 healthcare facilities, conducted by 1,834 surgeons, were included in the analysis. We observed significant intra- and inter-provider variations in wait times across all five surgical procedures. Inter-facility median wait time varied between six-fold for gallbladder surgery and 15-fold for knee arthroplasty. Inter-surgeon variation was more pronounced, ranging from a 17-fold median wait time difference for cataract surgery to a 216-fold difference for non-cancer uterine surgery. The proportion of variation in wait times attributable to facilities ranged from 6.2% for gallbladder surgery to 23.0% for cataract surgery. In comparison, surgeon-related variation ranged from 16.0% for non-cancer uterine surgery to 28.0% for cataract surgery., Implications: There is extreme variability in surgical wait times for five common, high-volume, non-urgent surgical procedures. Strategies to address surgical wait times must address the variation between service providers through better coordination of supply and demand. Approaches such as single-entry models could improve surgical system performance., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 de Jager et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Equitable access to surgical care has clinical and policy implications. We assess the association between social disadvantage and wait times for elective surgical procedures in Ontario., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using administrative data sets of adults receiving nonurgent inguinal hernia repair, cholecystectomy, hip arthroplasty, knee arthroplasty, arthroscopy, benign uterine surgery and cataract surgery from April 2013 to December 2019. We assessed the relation between exceeding target wait times and the highest versus lowest quintile of marginalization dimensions by use of generalized estimating equations logistic regression., Results: Of the 1 385 673 procedures included, 174 633 (12.6%) exceeded the target wait time. Adjusted analysis for cataract surgery found significantly increased odds of exceeding wait times for residential instability (adjusted odd ratio [OR] 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.21) and recent immigration (adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07-1.18). The highest deprivation quintile was associated with 18% (adjusted OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.12-1.24) and 20% (adjusted OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.12-1.28) increased odds of exceeding wait times for knee and hip arthroplasty, respectively. Residence in areas where higher proportions of residents self-identify as being part of a visible minority group was independently associated with reduced odds of exceeding target wait times for hip arthroplasty (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.91), cholecystectomy (adjusted OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.59-0.79) and hernia repair (adjusted OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.56-0.77) with an opposite effect in benign uterine surgery (adjusted OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17-1.40)., Interpretation: Social disadvantage had a small and inconsistent impact on receiving care within wait time targets. Future research should consider these differences as they relate to resource distribution and the organization of clinical service delivery., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© 2023 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors.)