			Home About us Contact

Priority Criteria (priority + criterion)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	80%

Selected Abstracts

Measurement-based admission control scheme with priority and service classes for application in wireless IP networks,

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, Issue 6 2003
Abbas Jamalipour
Abstract Wireless IP networks will provide voice and data services using IP protocols over the wireless channel. But current IP is unsuitable to provide delay or loss bounds and insufficient to support diverse quality of service, both required by real-time applications. In order to support real-time applications in wireless IP networks, in this paper a measurement-based admission control (MBAC) with priority criteria and service classes is considered. First we have shown the suitability of MBAC in wireless IP networks by comparing its performance with a parameter-based scheme. Next, we have investigated the performance of strictly policy-based MBAC and policy plus traffic characteristic-based MBAC schemes in terms of (1) increasing the user mobility, (2) changing traffic parameters and (3) the presence of greedy users. The efficiency and fairness of each scheme are measured in terms of lower class new and handoff traffic performance. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Solving the surgical waiting list problem?

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, Issue 4 2000
New Zealand's, booking system'
Abstract This article discusses the development and implementation of New Zealand's booking system for publicly funded non-urgent surgical and medical procedures. The ,booking system' emerged out of New Zealand's core services debate and the government's desire to remove waiting lists. It was targeted for implementation by mid-1998. However, the booking system remains in an unsatisfactory state and a variety of problems have plagued its introduction. These include a lack of national consistency in the priority access criteria, failure to pilot the system and a shortfall in the levels of funding available to treat the numbers of patients whose priority criteria ,scores' deem them clinically eligible for surgery. The article discusses endeavours to address these problems. In conclusion, based on the New Zealand experience, the article provides lessons for policy-makers interested in introducing surgical booking systems. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Waiting list management: priority criteria or first-in first-out?

JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, Issue 4 2009
A case for total joint replacement
Abstract Background, Total joint replacements are interventions with large waiting times from indication to the surgery management. These patients can be managed in two ways; first-in first-out or through a priority tool. The aim of this study was to compare real time on waiting list (TWL) with a priority criteria score, developed by our team, in patients awaiting joint replacement due to osteoarthritis. Methods, Consecutive patients placed on waiting list were eligible. Patients fulfilled a questionnaire which included items of our priority tool and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) specific questionnaire. Other priority items were extracted from the clinical history. The priority tool gives a score from 0 to 100 points, and three categories (urgent, preferent and ordinary). We studied the differences among categories and TWL by means of one-way analysis of variance. Correlational analysis was used to evaluate association among priority score and TWL and WOMAC baseline and gains at 6 months with priority score and TWL. Results, We have studied 684 patients. Women represented 62% of sample. The mean age was 70 years. There were not association between the categories of priority score and TWL (P = 0.12). The rho correlation coefficient between TWL and priority score was ,0.11. Among baseline WOMAC scores and priority score, the rho coefficients were 0.79, 0.7 and 0.52 with function, pain and stiffness dimensions, respectively. There were differences in the mean scores of WOMAC dimensions according to the three priority categories (P < 0.001) but no with TWL categories. Data of gains in both health-related quality of life dimensions at 6 months were similar, with differences according to priority categories but no regarding TWL. Conclusions, The results of the study support the necessity of implementing a prioritization system instead of the actual system if we want to manage the waiting list for joint replacement with clinical equity. [source]

Prioritization of cataract surgery: Visual analogue scale versus scoring system

ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, Issue 7 2005
Victoria W. Y. Wong
Background: The purpose of the present paper was to evaluate the variability of using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and to assess the feasibility of a priority-setting scoring system for prioritizing elective cataract surgery. Methods: Consecutive cases listed for cataract surgery were prospectively recruited. Ophthalmologists listed patients to undergo early or normal surgery and were asked to rate the urgency of surgery using a VAS. Patients were then reassessed and a cataract surgery prioritization (CSP) score was calculated based on the New Zealand priority criteria for cataract surgery. Correlation coefficients between VAS and CSP scores were calculated to determine the variability among ophthalmologists in using the VAS in prioritizing surgery. Further analyses were performed to assess the potential impact of implementing the CSP system. Results: A total of 326 patients were recruited. There was a positive correlation between VAS and CSP scores (Spearman ,= 0.407, P < 0.001). A high degree of variation among ophthalmologists in the use of VAS was found. Patients with poor binocular vision were not listed as early, whereas patients with poor vision in the eye listed for cataract surgery but good vision in the fellow eye were more likely to be prioritized to have early operation. These findings suggest that patients with severe impairment in binocular visual function were not adequately accounted for during cataract surgery listing. Conclusions: The use of a VAS for prioritizing cataract surgery may be suboptimal due to high subjectivity. Adoption of an objective criteria-validated priority-setting scoring system may allow better stratification of patients to ensure better service provision. [source]