Skip to main content

Table 1 Pre vs. post-implementation appointment types 

From: Using Lean Six Sigma techniques to improve efficiency in outpatient ophthalmology clinics

  Pre-implementation (all visits) [n, %] Pre-implementation (visits with valid data only) [n,%] Pre-implementation pairwise p (all visits vs. valid only) Patient in-clinic time (minutes) [median, Q1-Q3] Post-implementation (all visits) [n,%] Post-implementation (visits with valid data only) [n, %] Post-implementation pairwise p (all visits vs. valid only) Patient in-clinic time (minutes) [median, Q1-Q3] Pairwise p (pre-implementation vs. post-implementation total cohort)
Cataract New 107 (3.0%) 60 (2.7%) 0.442 188, 121–269 129 (3.3%) 120 (3.4%) 0.767 125, 84–179 0.186
Emergency referral 368 (10.2%) 214 (9.5%) 0.343 119, 79–184 442 (11.5%) 378 (10.8%) 0.235 109, 70–159 0.013
Follow-up 2455 (67.7%) 1555 (69.4%) 0.096 132, 89–210 2442 (63.4%) 2249 (64.4%) 0.193 105, 71–157 *<0.001
Inpatient referral 245 (6.8%) 91 (4.1%) *<0.001 213, 123–311 308 (8.0%) 250 (7.2%) 0.070 117, 67–220 *0.006
New 248 (6.8%) 144 (6.4%) 0.434 161, 106–252 290 (7.5%) 263 (7.5%) 0.984 132, 102–179 0.119
Post-op day one 201 (5.5%) 177 (7.9%) *<0.001 75, 49–146 242 (6.3%) 230 (6.6%) 0.451 78, 64–104 0.068
Total 3624 2241   131, 84–217 3853 3490   107, 71–162  
  1. For all pairwise comparisons p significant at < 0.008 (Bonferroni correction); * significant post-hoc test
  2. In the pre-implementation audit period, there were some slight differences in proportions of types of patients seen between the valid data cohort and the total cohort. Comparing appointment types of all patients seen pre- and post- implementation, there were some minor differences in proportions of follow-up patients seen due to restructuring of the clinic timetable