Abstract
Introduction Operating room (OR) turnover time (TT), defined as the interval between the completion of one surgery and the start of the next, is a critical measure of OR efficiency impacting healthcare costs, patient outcomes, and surgical staff well-being. Previous research has identified various contributors to TT, such as surgical team dynamics, OR preparation, and interdisciplinary workflows. However, the influence of surgeon-specific factors like gender, administrative roles, and experience on TT remains underexplored. This study aims to address this gap by examining how these individual surgeon characteristics impact OR efficiency.
Methods We conducted a retrospective study at the UC San Diego School of Medicine, a tertiary academic medical center. We analysed 12,820 surgical case entries from January 2022 to July 2023, sourced from the electronic health record system. Surgeons were categorized by gender, ethnicity, years of experience, training at UCSD, academic rank, and administrative roles. We utilized Mann-Whitney U test for binary variables and Kruskal-Wallis H test for variables with more than two categories. Multivariable linear regression was applied, adjusting for multiple comparisons using Holm correction. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS version 29.
Results Our analysis of 12,820 surgical cases revealed that surgeons in administrative roles and those with over ten years of experience demonstrated significantly shorter turnover times (TT). Specifically, administrators demonstrated a TT of 27 minutes, compared to 35 minutes for non-administrators (p<0.001) (Table 2). Surgeons with more than ten years of experience had a TT of 31 minutes, versus 37 minutes for those with less experience (p<0.001). Multivariable linear regression confirmed these associations, with significant reductions in TT linked to administrative roles (beta: - 7.2; 95% confidence interval (CI): -8.2 to -6.2, p<0.001) and surgeon experience (beta: -4.7, 95% CI: -5.9 to -3.5, p< 0.001).
Conclusion We recommend efforts focusing on building a standardized environment for surgeons regardless of their background. This could lead to not only an equitable. OR culture but also an overall increase in the institution efficiency and patient outcomes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Our proposal was approved by our institution Aligning and Coordinating Quality Improvement, Research, and Evaluation (ACQUIRE) Committee, which approves all projects that are intended for local improvement of care. The ACQUIRE Committee is a dedicated ethics oversight body and approves all quality-improvement projects that don't require an IRB.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Category of submission: Research Letter
Conflicts of interest/ Disclosures : None
Sources of funding: None
Data availability: available upon request
Ethics statement: Our proposal was approved by our institution Aligning and Coordinating Quality Improvement, Research, and Evaluation (ACQUIRE) Committee. The ACQUIRE Committee is a dedicated ethics oversight body and approves all quality-improvement projects that don’t require an IRB.
Data Availability
Available upon request
