Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Urology ; 177: 6-11, 2023 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37160169

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the contribution of nonprocedural operating room (OR) times to transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) operative efficiency. METHODS: Over a 24-month period, all nonprocedural OR times from TURBT surgeries performed at a single institution were prospectively collected. Nonprocedural times included: in-room to anesthesia release time, anesthesia release to cut time, and close to wheels out time. Procedural OR time was cut to close time. We also analyzed the impact of time of day on TURBT efficiency (morning vs afternoon). Comparisons between groups were made using the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables. RESULTS: We identified 777 consecutive TURBT procedures from 2019 to 2020. The median total OR time was 63 minutes (interquartile range: 50-81 minutes). The nonprocedural time occupied a median of 49.4% of the total operating time (interquartile range: 38.9%-60.4%). Median anesthesia release to cut time was slower when 1 TURBT was performed a day compared to 2 or more (13 minutes vs 12 minutes, P = .04). Median close to wheels out time was faster when there was 1 TURBT in a day (7 minutes vs 8 minutes, P = .02). Median in-room to anesthesia release time was faster in the morning than it was in the afternoon (10 minutes vs 11 minutes, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Nonprocedural times made up roughly half of the total TURBT operating time and should be considered in OR efficiency analyses. TURBT OR efficiency may be related to the number of TURBTs performed in a day as well as the time of day of TURBT start.


Asunto(s)
Quirófanos , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria , Humanos , Resección Transuretral de la Vejiga , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/patología , Cistectomía/métodos , Factores de Tiempo
2.
J Robot Surg ; 17(3): 853-858, 2023 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36318380

RESUMEN

To analyze operating room (OR) efficiency by evaluating fixed and variable OR times for open (OPN) and robotic-assisted partial nephrectomies (RAPN). We analyzed consecutive OPN and RAPN performed by one surgeon over a 24-month period. All patients were placed in the lateral decubitus position and secured with a beanbag regardless of approach. Fixed (non-procedural) OR times were prospectively collected and defined as: in-room to anesthesia-release time (IRAT), anesthesia release to cut time (ARCT), and close to wheels-out time (CTWO). Variable OR time was procedural cut to close time (CTCT). Comparisons of fixed and variable OR time points between OPN and RAPN were performed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. 146 RAPN and 31 OPN were evaluated from 2019-2020. Median IRAT was similar for RAPN versus OPN [20 min (IQR: 16-25) vs. 20 min (IQR: 16-26), P = 0.57]. Median ARCT was longer for RAPN than it was for OPN [40 min (IQR: 36-46) vs. 34 min (IQR: 30-39), P < 0.001]. Median CTWO was similar for OPN (12 min, IQR: 9-14) and RAPN (11 min, IQR: 7-15) (P = 0.89). Median CTCT was longer for RAPN (202 min, IQR: 170-236) compared to OPN (164 min, IQR: 154-184) (P < 0.001). In a single surgeon, partial nephrectomy series with the same patient positioning, utilization of robotic technology was associated with longer surgeon operating time as well as less efficient fixed OR times, specifically ARCT.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Renales , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Neoplasias Renales/cirugía , Quirófanos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Nefrectomía , Estudios Retrospectivos
3.
Urology ; 168: 86-89, 2022 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35772482

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate factors influencing fixed operating room time during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed for all holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) cases performed by a single surgeon over a 24-month period. Operating room (OR) time was divided into fixed and variable time. The variable time was defined as cut-to-close time. Fixed time included in room time to anesthesia release time (IRAT), anesthesia release time to cut time (ARCT), and close time to wheels out (CTWO). The effects of time of day and anesthesia personnel (AP) changes on fixed operating room time were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 406 HoLEPs were analyzed. There was no statistically significant difference in nonprocedural OR times between morning and afternoon surgeries (IRAT, P = .38, ARCT P = .10, CTWO P = .77). Median nonprocedural OR times accounted for 27% (IQR: 22%-31%) of the total procedure time in the AM group and 29% (IQR: 24%-33%) in the PM group (P = .005). Of the HoLEPs,78.1% (178/228) experienced one or more AP changes during the procedure. The median fixed OR time was not significantly different between procedures with 1 AP and procedures with ≥2 APs (IRAT, P = .53; ARCT, P = .71; CTWO, P = .98). CONCLUSION: Fixed operating room time makes up a significant portion of HoLEP procedures and should be considered when evaluating OR efficiency. The time of day and number of anesthesia personnel involved did not affect the fixed OR times.


Asunto(s)
Terapia por Láser , Láseres de Estado Sólido , Hiperplasia Prostática , Resección Transuretral de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Láseres de Estado Sólido/uso terapéutico , Próstata/cirugía , Hiperplasia Prostática/cirugía , Quirófanos , Resección Transuretral de la Próstata/métodos , Terapia por Láser/métodos , Holmio , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos
4.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 6(4): 373-380, 2022 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35765690

RESUMEN

Objective: To evaluate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, on operating room (OR) efficiency for urologic procedures using the concept of fixed OR times. Patients and Methods: Over a 24-month period, urology OR data were prospectively collected. Operations were divided into fixed and variable time points. The fixed OR times were in-roomw to anesthesia-release time, anesthesia-release to cut time, in-room to cut time, and close to wheels-out time. Data from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019, were pre-COVID-19 data, and data from April 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, were post-COVID-19 data. Operations were grouped into endoscopic, implant, major open, and robotic-assisted cases. In the post-COVID-19 era, all patients had a negative polymerase chain reaction test result within 48 hours of operation. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare the fixed OR times between the pre- and post-COVID-19 eras. Results: A total of 3189 procedures were evaluated: 2058 endoscopic operations (1124 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 934 in the post-COVID-19 era), 343 implant procedures (192 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 151 in the post-COVID-19 era), 222 major open procedures (119 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 103 in the post-COVID-19 era), and 566 robotic-assisted procedures (338 in the pre-COVID-19 era and 228 in the post-COVID-19 era). There were no fixed OR times in any of the examined groups that were negatively impacted by COVID-19. The percentage of the total OR time occupied by fixed OR variables in the pre-COVID-19 era was 40.6% for endoscopic operations, 41.1% for implant procedures, 29.8% for major open procedures, and 21.8% for robotic-assisted procedures. Conclusion: A substantial portion of the total OR time includes fixed time points. Furthermore, COVID-19 did not have a negative impact on fixed OR times in a negative testing environment. Urologic OR efficiency should be maintained in the post-COVID-19 era.

5.
J Endourol ; 36(5): 654-660, 2022 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34937418

RESUMEN

Objective: To analyze operating room (OR) efficiency by evaluating fixed OR times for three common urologic robot-assisted procedures. Methods: Over a 24-month period, we prospectively collected intraoperative data for 635 consecutive robot-assisted surgeries. Fixed (nonprocedural) OR times were evaluated for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) (n = 146), robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) (n = 77), and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) (n = 412). Fixed OR times were defined as nonprocedural time in the OR, including in-room time to anesthesia release time (IRAT), anesthesia release to cut time (ARCT), in-room time to cut time (IRCT; IRAT+ARCT), and close time to wheels out time (CTWO). The effects of operation time of day and the number of anesthesia personnel (AP) present in procedure on fixed OR times were also analyzed. Results: Fixed OR times occupied 15.1% (IQR: 12.9%-17.1%) (RARC), 26.6% (22.9%-30.8%) (RAPN), and 20.1% (17.4%-23.1%) (RARP) of total OR time. Time of day did not have a negative effect on fixed OR times for robotic urologic surgeries. Median AP count was highest for RARC (median: 3 and range: 1-7). We did not find any association between AP count and fixed OR times for any of the procedures (p ≥ 0.19). Conclusions: Fixed OR times made up a significant percentage of total OR time for robot-assisted procedures and should be incorporated into OR efficiency analyses. The number of AP per case and time of day of procedure did not negatively impact fixed OR times in urologic robotic surgeries.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Robótica , Cistectomía/métodos , Humanos , Masculino , Quirófanos , Tempo Operativo , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento
6.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 5(1): 151-160, 2021 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33521584

RESUMEN

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created an extremely disruptive challenge for health care leaders that required a rapid, dynamic, and innovative response. The purpose of this manuscript is to share the leadership actions and decisions at Mayo Clinic in Florida during the first 6 months of the pandemic (February to July 2020). We note 4 strategies that contributed to an effective response: (1) leverage experience with disaster preparedness and mobilize regional and national networks; (2) use surge models to anticipate and to address supply chain issues as well as practical and financial effects of the pandemic; (3) adapt creatively to establish new safety and procedural protocols in various areas for various populations; and (4) communicate timely information effectively and be the common source of truth. Mayo Clinic in Florida was able to address the surges of patients with COVID-19, to provide ongoing tertiary care, and to restore function within the first 6 months with new, strengthened practices and protocols.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...