Waiting time for scheduled outpatient specialist consultations by access pathway in public hospitals in Ecuador
Armijos Briones, M.; Diaz Cercado, E.; Marcillo-Toala, O.; Ayala Aguirre, P. E.; Benitez Sellan, P. L.; Lanata-Flores, A.; Armijos Bazurto, N.
Show abstract
Objective To quantify waiting time in days for scheduled outpatient specialist consultations and to compare waiting time between standardized and non-standardized access pathways in Ecuadorian public hospitals. Methods We analyzed hospital-based survey data from Ecuadorian public hospitals, restricted to adults attending a scheduled outpatient specialist consultation (n = 4,436). Emergency care, unscheduled urgent visits, procedures, and follow-up visits were excluded by design. Access pathway was classified from participants self-report as standardized (institutional or system-based) or non-standardized (informal or non-system-based). Waiting time, defined as the number of days between obtaining the appointment and attending the consultation, was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Sociodemographic correlates of non-standardized access were examined using adjusted logistic regression, and adjusted median differences were estimated using quantile regression ({tau} = 0.50). Analyses were stratified into direct-access specialties and referral-required specialties. Results Non-standardized access was associated with shorter waiting times than standardized access. In adjusted median regression, non-standardized access was associated with a 3.2-day shorter median waiting time (95% CI -4.6 to -1.8). The difference was larger in direct-access specialties (-15.0 days, 95% CI -15.0 to -6.0) than in referral-required specialties (-5.0 days, 95% CI -5.0 to 0.0). Conclusion Among patients who attended a scheduled outpatient specialist consultation in Ecuadorian public hospitals, non-standardized access was associated with shorter waiting times, particularly in direct-access specialties. These findings suggest that, within routine outpatient care, parallel access pathways may shape timeliness and warrant greater transparency in appointment allocation and referral coordination.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.