Work-Time Distribution of Physicians at a German University Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The effective utilization of staff resources is of decisive importance for the adequate, appropriate, and economical delivery of hospital services. The goal of this study was to determine the distribution of working time among doctors in a German university hospital-in particular, in terms of type of activities and time of day. METHODS: The distribution of working time was determined from 14-day samples taken in seven clinical departments of the Medical Center-University of Freiburg. In each 14-day sample, the activities being carried out at multiple, randomly chosen times were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 250 doctors (participation rate: 83%) took part in the study. A total of 20 715 hours of working time was analyzed, representing twelve years of full-time employment. Overall, 46% of working time in the inpatient sector was spent in direct contact with patients, with relevant differences among the participating clinical departments: for instance, the percentage of time taken up by patient contact was 35% in pediatrics and 60% in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Patient contact was highest (over 50% overall) in the period 8 a.m. to 12 noon. CONCLUSION: The amount of working time taken up by activities other than direct patient contact was found to be lower than in previous studies. It remains unclear what distribution of working time is best for patient care and whether it would be possible or desirable to increase the time that doctors spend in direct contact with patients.

A time study of physicians' work in a German university eye hospital to estimate unit costs.

BACKGROUND: Technical efficiency of hospital services is debated since performance has been heterogeneous. Staff time represents the main resource in patient care and its inappropriate allocation has been identified as a key factor of inefficiency. The aim of this study was to analyse the utilisation of physicians' work time stratified by staff groups, tasks and places of work. A further aim was to use these data to estimate resource use per unit of output. METHODS: A self-reporting work-sampling study was carried during 14-days at a University Eye Hospital. Staff costs of physicians per unit of output were calculated at the wards, the operating rooms and the outpatient unit. RESULTS: Forty per cent of total work time was spent in contact with the patient. Thirty per cent was spent with documentation tasks. Time spent with documentation tasks declined monotonically with increasing seniority of staff. Unit costs were 56 € per patient day at the wards, 77 € and 20 € per intervention at the operating rooms for inpatients and outpatients, respectively, and 33 € per contact at the outpatient unit. Substantial differences in resources directly dedicated to the patient were found between these locations. CONCLUSION: The presented data provide unprecedented units costs in inpatient Ophthalmology. Future research should focus on analysing factors that influence differences in time allocation, such as types of patients, organisation of care processes and composition of staff.

Where, when and what? A time study of surgeons' work in urology.

INTRODUCTION: Staff time is a relevant resource in the delivery of health care interventions. Its measurement is a prerequisite for unit costing but usually complex. The aim of this study was to analyse the distribution of surgeons' work time among types and places of activities. A second aim was to use these data to calculate costs per unit of output. METHODS: A self-reporting work sampling study was carried out at a department of Urology. All of twelve surgeons involved in clinical care participated in a two-week analysis of their work time. RESULTS: A total of 2,485 data-points were collected, representing about 1,242 hours of work time. Surgeons spent the greater part of their work time in direct patient care, but substantial shares were required for documentation and organisation. Assistants were mainly required at the wards and consultants at the operating theatre and the outpatient unit. Staff costs of surgeons were 32 € and 29 € per patient day at the wards, respectively, 1.30 € per minute at the operating theatre and 32 € per visit at the outpatient unit. CONCLUSION: Results provided a basis for costing of health care interventions at the study site. However, future research should focus on the establishment of standardised terminology in order to increase transferability of results.