A new approach to kidney wait-list management in the kidney allocation system era: Pilot implementation and evaluation.

Kidney transplant wait-list management is becoming increasingly complex. We introduced a novel wait-list management strategy at our center, the Transplant Readiness Assessment Clinic (TRAC), whereby patients whose Kidney Allocation Scores surpass a threshold are actively managed. From January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017, we evaluated 195 patients through TRAC. Compared to pre-TRAC systems at our institution, TRAC resulted in a higher proportion of activation at 18 months (38% vs 22%-26%, P < 0.0001), despite being enriched in patients with long dialysis duration. TRAC also resulted in a higher proportion of wait-list removal (15% vs 8%-9%, P < 0.05) although combined wait-list removal and death on wait-list did not differ (18% vs 16%-17%). Median time to activation was 356 days from TRAC evaluation. Of the transplant barriers, need for cardiovascular studies was the most common (31%), followed by other medical issues (23%), poor functional status (13%), and psychosocial issues (10%). By concentrating center resources on patients most likely to be transplanted after activation and performing active patient management close to the time of transplant, TRAC has the potential to significantly enhance kidney transplant success in regions with long wait-times.

Operationalizing wait lists: Strategies and experiences in three hospital outpatient physiotherapy departments in Montreal.

In Canada, limited resources and increasing demand place pressure on the public healthcare system, something that is likely to increase. In this context, wait lists in outpatient physiotherapy departments (OPD) will get longer, system inefficiencies will arise, and frustrations and ethical concerns will be experienced by patients and staff. To better understand the perceptions of OPD staff regarding priority setting, treatment frequency, treatment duration, and wait list management strategies, we conducted an Interpretive Description study involving semi-structured interviews in three OPDs in Montreal. Participants discussed factors that influenced their decision making about who was prioritized to receive care, strategies that were used to respond to an imbalance between needs and resources in the OPDs and procedures to manage wait lists to help improve access to care. While clinical needs are central in approaches to prioritization, other non-clinical factors relating to the patient, the physiotherapist, and the institution also influence decisions. We examine these findings through the lens of complexity theory, providing insight into opportunities and obstacles for the implementation of management strategies in OPDs. These strategies will need to be carefully evaluated in order to create evidence-based guidelines for wait list management in other settings.

Priority-setting for children's mental health: clinical usefulness and validity of the priority criteria score.

OBJECTIVE: The 17-item PCS was designed for priority-setting and queue management of children and adolescents referred for mental health services. Here we assess aspects of the validity of the Children's Mental Health (CMH) Priority Criteria Score (PCS), developed by the Western Canada Waiting List Project (WCWL). The PCS was evaluated across clinical settings of increasing acuity and in terms of its relationship to two variables reflecting criteria-related validity and actual wait times. METHOD: Intake workers completed PCS forms for 497 referrals enrolled for treatment in three clinical areas over approximately two fiscal years. The completion time of the PCS form was estimated in relation to the total referral and screening process. Intake workers completed the PCS items and did not use the total score at the time of intake and form completion to triage or place clients; hence, the PCS was independent of enrollment and placement within the continuum of care. Furthermore, clinicians in the receiving programs had to accept the triage decisions for the PCS to be used in the study analysis. RESULTS: The PCS score was meaningfully related to the measures of criteria-related validity (e.g., clinician perceived urgency, clinician perceived maximum acceptable waiting times) and triage to clinical settings of increasing acuity. There was a significant mean difference in the PCS for those accepted to community, day, or inpatient settings. CONCLUSIONS: The PCS appears to be a useful, efficient measure of clinical urgency adequate for use in priority-setting for children waiting for mental health services.