Aazad Abbas MD, Imran Saleh MASc, Paul Wong MD, MSc, FRCSC, Jeremie Larouche MD, MSc, FRCSC, Jihad Abouali MD, FRCSC, Sam Park MD, MASc, FRCSC, Timothy C.Y. Chan PhD, Vahid Sarhangian PhD, Jay Toor MD, MBA, FRCSC
{"title":"Optimizing Daily Surgical Scheduling Improves Operative Time Consumption: A Retrospective Study","authors":"Aazad Abbas MD, Imran Saleh MASc, Paul Wong MD, MSc, FRCSC, Jeremie Larouche MD, MSc, FRCSC, Jihad Abouali MD, FRCSC, Sam Park MD, MASc, FRCSC, Timothy C.Y. Chan PhD, Vahid Sarhangian PhD, Jay Toor MD, MBA, FRCSC","doi":"10.1016/j.artd.2025.101926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Arthroplasty cases represent some of the highest volume and resource-intensive orthopaedic procedures. Most cost containment efforts have focused on restricting access to operating room (OR) time rather than improving efficiency through scheduling optimization. However, approaches such as bin-packing optimization (BPO) can be used to generate more efficient schedules. This study compares manual scheduling with BPO to evaluate their impact on OR efficiency. Our hypothesis is that BPO scheduling produces more efficient OR schedules compared to manual scheduling.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Data were collected retrospectively for a mid-sized hospital performing elective orthopaedic surgery (majority hip and knee arthroplasty). Data included operative time, overtime, and number of OR days. BPO model was used to simulate an optimized schedule and compared to the historic manual schedule by comparing the number of OR days required to complete the same surgical volume. The primary outcome was the total number of OR days required.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>All surgeons experienced a median 10% reduction (range: 9.2%–18.3%) in OR days required using BPO schedules (mean 183 days) vs historical scheduling (mean 207 days). Daily OR configurations differed from historical ones in 87% of cases, and the number of configurations per surgeon dropped from an average of 6 to 4.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>BPO increased OR throughput by 10% without increasing operative time. This suggests potential for reduced costs, shorter wait lists, and improved surgeon satisfaction for hip and knee arthroplasty. Future work should incorporate predictive modeling using patient- and procedure-specific data.</div></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><div>III – Retrospective study.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37940,"journal":{"name":"Arthroplasty Today","volume":"39 ","pages":"Article 101926"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13321381/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroplasty Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352344125003139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Arthroplasty cases represent some of the highest volume and resource-intensive orthopaedic procedures. Most cost containment efforts have focused on restricting access to operating room (OR) time rather than improving efficiency through scheduling optimization. However, approaches such as bin-packing optimization (BPO) can be used to generate more efficient schedules. This study compares manual scheduling with BPO to evaluate their impact on OR efficiency. Our hypothesis is that BPO scheduling produces more efficient OR schedules compared to manual scheduling.
Methods
Data were collected retrospectively for a mid-sized hospital performing elective orthopaedic surgery (majority hip and knee arthroplasty). Data included operative time, overtime, and number of OR days. BPO model was used to simulate an optimized schedule and compared to the historic manual schedule by comparing the number of OR days required to complete the same surgical volume. The primary outcome was the total number of OR days required.
Results
All surgeons experienced a median 10% reduction (range: 9.2%–18.3%) in OR days required using BPO schedules (mean 183 days) vs historical scheduling (mean 207 days). Daily OR configurations differed from historical ones in 87% of cases, and the number of configurations per surgeon dropped from an average of 6 to 4.
Conclusions
BPO increased OR throughput by 10% without increasing operative time. This suggests potential for reduced costs, shorter wait lists, and improved surgeon satisfaction for hip and knee arthroplasty. Future work should incorporate predictive modeling using patient- and procedure-specific data.
期刊介绍:
Arthroplasty Today is a companion journal to the Journal of Arthroplasty. The journal Arthroplasty Today brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement of the hip and knee in an open-access, online format. Arthroplasty Today solicits manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas of scientific endeavor that relate to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with patient outcomes, economic and policy issues, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, and biologic response to arthroplasty. The journal focuses on case reports. It is the purpose of Arthroplasty Today to present material to practicing orthopaedic surgeons that will keep them abreast of developments in the field, prove useful in the care of patients, and aid in understanding the scientific foundation of this subspecialty area of joint replacement. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal''s area of interest. Their participation ensures that each issue of Arthroplasty Today provides the reader with timely, peer-reviewed articles of the highest quality.