4.6 Article

Scheduling operating rooms of multiple hospitals considering transportation and deterioration in mass-casualty incidents

期刊

ANNALS OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH
卷 321, 期 1-2, 页码 717-753

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10479-022-05094-4

关键词

Operating room; Scheduling; Mass casualty incident; Ambulance dispatching; Heuristics; FA-VNS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, the authors propose a model and algorithm to solve the patient-to-hospital assignment and patient surgery sequence problem in mass casualty incidents. The proposed algorithm, a hybrid Firefly Algorithm-Variable Neighborhood Search incorporating a heuristic method, achieves superior performance compared to other algorithms in terms of computation time and results.
In mass casualty incidents, patients need to be evacuated to nearby hospitals as soon as possible, and a surge in demand for emergency medical services then occurs. It would result in ambulance offload delays, i.e., no emergency operating room is available when the ambulance arrives at a hospital, and thus the patients cannot be treated immediately. In this paper, we aim to solve a combinatorial problem of patient-to-hospital assignment and patient surgery sequence considering patient deterioration and ambulance offload delay during a mass casualty incident. A mixed-integer programming model is proposed. The objective is to minimize the completion time of all patients' surgeries. For solving such a problem, some structural properties of our studied problem are derived, and a heuristic is developed to solve the single operating room scheduling problem considering ambulance offload delay and patient deterioration based on these structural properties. A hybrid Firefly Algorithm-Variable Neighborhood Search algorithm incorporating the heuristic method is proposed to solve it. Our proposed algorithm can solve the problem within a short computation time, and the computational results demonstrate the superiority of our proposed algorithm over the compared algorithms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据