Healthcare Policy/Economics
Poster Session 1
Amber Campbell, N/A
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Leena Ghrayeb, MS
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Cynthia Joy Johnson Monickaraj, BS
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Arman Getzen, N/A
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Natalia Eddy (they/them/theirs)
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Molly J. Stout, MD, MSCI (she/her/hers)
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Amy Cohn, PhD
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Alex Peahl, MD, MSc
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI, United States
To assess the effects of a new tailored prenatal care policy on clinical capacity and efficiency, accounting for dynamic patient trajectories in pregnancy.
Study Design: We conducted a discrete event simulation study of traditional versus tailored prenatal care policies. We compared the traditional care model (14 in-person visits for all patients), to a schedule tailored to medical risk (high-risk: 13 visits; low-risk: 9 visits), and preference for care modality (in-person vs. virtual). We also introduced dynamic patient trajectories to account for medically low-risk patients who develop complications (e.g. gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension) in pregnancy, requiring transition to the high-risk schedule. Data inputs were derived from 4,992 real patients who received prenatal care and gave birth at a single academic institution from March 1 2022 to March 1 2023. Simulation parameters included probability of diagnosis of complications, preference for hybrid care (derived from local survey data), patient risk level, and dynamic patient arrival times. The simulation was run in C++ for 100 replications of 92 weeks each. We reported on measures of clinical operations including capacity utilization, patient delay, and overbooking.
Results: In the dynamic patient simulation, 12.18% of low-risk patients became high-risk. Of patients who switched, the average number of appointments added to the pathway was 1. Following a traditional visit schedule showed in-person capacity utilization of 107%, implying overbooking, and patient delay of 0.41 weeks per patient on average. When compared to a traditional visit schedule, implementing a tailored prenatal care policy showed average capacity utilization of 92% (including in-person and virtual appointments), eliminating overbooking. Patient delay was reduced to 0.36 weeks per patient.
Conclusion: The implementation of tailored prenatal visit schedules allowing for a dynamic patient type model eliminates in-person overbooking and reduces patient delays. Further study is needed to determine the optimal proportion of clinic capacity to allocate to virtual care.