Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01639443

Reducing VA No-Shows: Evaluation of Predictive Overbooking Applied to Colonoscopy

In this research study, investigators use colonoscopy as a case example to evaluate a predictive overbooking model derived using patient-level predictors of absenteeism. The no-show overbooking intervention employs a logistic regression model that uses patient data to predict the odds of no-showing with 80% accuracy. These projected no-show appointments will be overbooked by clerks for patients who agree to join a "fast track" short-call line. By rapidly processing endoscopy patients and moving them out of traditional slots, investigators predict more scheduling slots would become available for patients awaiting colonoscopy.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, West Los Angeles, CA

West Los Angeles, California, 90073, United States

About this study

Patient "no-shows" are especially common in VA gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy units, where both open-access endoscopy scheduling and patient dislike of procedures contribute to high absenteeism. In this proposal, investigators use endoscopy as a case example to evaluate a predictive overbooking model derived using patient-level predictors of absenteeism. The no-show overbooking intervention employs a logistic regression model that uses patient data to predict the odds of no-showing with 80% accuracy. These projected no-show appointments will be overbooked by clerks for patients who agree to join a "fast track" short-call line. However, patients scheduled for upper endoscopies in the "fast track" assume a small risk of service denial on the day of their overbooking in case of inaccurate predictions. If this occurs, the patient is guaranteed service in the next available position and is assured of having a shorter wait time. Patients scheduled for colonoscopies will never be turned down but may experience delays in the waiting room the day of their "fast track" appointment. By rapidly processing endoscopy patients and moving them out of traditional slots, investigators predict more scheduling slots would become available for patients awaiting colonoscopy. Investigators propose to conduct a prospective, 24-month, interrupted time series (ITS) trial in the WLAVA (West Los Angeles Veterans Administration) GI clinic endoscopy unit. During intervention periods, investigators will activate the no-show predictive overbooking strategy described above. Investigators will compare outcomes between scheduling strategies, including differences in percent utilization of capacity (primary outcome), number of Veterans served, mean patient lag time between scheduling and procedure, number of unexpected service denials ("bumps") from no-show predictive overbooking, and direct costs of care. Investigators will analyze differences using both traditional univariate and multivariate approaches, and using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) analyses to adjust for auto-correlations in ITS data.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients who are scheduled for upper endoscopy and agree to the terms of "fast track" offer.

Exclusion criteria

  • If a patient expresses concern about service denial, confusion about the bargain, or refuses to participate, the investigators will schedule these patients routinely.

Treatment and study plan

Predictive no-show overbooking

Other

During intervention period, every Veteran scheduled for an endoscopy will be offered "fast-track" offer, which gives them a chance to get their endoscopy procedure done earlier than usual scheduling by overbooking their appointment in a predictive no-show slot.

Primary outcomes

  1. Percentage of GI Clinic Capacity Filled

    Time frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic

    Investigators' primary objective will be to evaluate the impact of no-show predictive overbooking on percentage of the GI endoscopy clinic that are filled on a given day. Days where at least one Fast-tracked patient attended an appointment were compared to days where only Control patients attended appointments. Percentage of GI Clinic Capacity is calculated as the number of appointments completed divided by number of appointment spots available on a given day. This percentage was compared between Fast-tracked days and Control days, using data from 1672 patients.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Scheduling-to-procedure Lag Time

    Time frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic

    The investigators will calculate the mean daily lag time for all colonoscopy and upper endoscopies performed per day

  2. Daily Service Denials ("Bumps")

    Time frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic

    The investigators will compare the number of patients bumped per day between scheduling approaches

  3. Advanced Adenoma Detection/Cecal Intubation Rates

    Time frame: After 20 months of running study in clinic

    The investigators will compare daily advanced adenomatous polyp detection and daily cecal intubation rates between groups.

  4. Length of Workday

    Time frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic

    Length of Workday in hours (comparing days with Fast-Tracked Appointments to Control days without)

  5. Cost Comparisons

    Time frame: After 12 months of running study in clinic

    For cost comparisons, the investigators will aggregate total provider overtime costs for colonoscopies performed. Cost is reported per day.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

VA Office of Research and Development

Fed

Registry information

Acronym: No-show

Important dates

Study start
2013
Primary completion
2015
Study completion
2016
First posted
Jul 12, 2012
Registry last updated
Apr 12, 2018

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.