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