Improving CT scan capabilities with a new trauma workflow concept: Simulation of hospital logistics using different CT scanner scenarios

P.H.P. Fung Kon Jin, M.G.W. Dijkgraaf, C.L. Alons, C. van Kuijk, L.F.M. Beenen, G.M. Koole, J.C. Goslings

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

21 Citations (Scopus)


The Amsterdam Trauma Workflow (ATW) concept includes a sliding gantry CT scanner serving two mirrored (trauma) rooms. In this study, several predefined scenarios with a varying number of CT scanners and CT locations are analyzed to identify the best performing patient flow management strategy from an institutional perspective on process quality. A total of six clinically relevant scenarios with variables that included the number of CT scanners, CT scanner location, and different patient categories (regular, urgent, and trauma patients) were evaluated using computer simulation. Each scenario was simulated using institutional data and was assessed for patient waiting times, idle time of CT scanners, and overtime due to scheduling. The best 2- and 3-scanner scenarios were additionally evaluated with the ATW-concept. Based on institutional data, the best 2-scanner scenario distributes all 3 patient categories over both scanners and plans 4 urgent patients per hour while locating both scanners outside of the trauma room. The best 3-scanner scenario distributes urgent and regular patients over all 3 scanners and trauma patients on only 1 scanner and locates all CT scanners outside of the trauma room. The ATW concept reduces waiting times and overtime, while increasing idle time. Choosing the optimal planning and distribution strategies depends on the number and location of available CT scanners, along with number of trauma, urgent and regular patients. The Amsterdam Trauma Workflow concept could provide institutions with the ability of early CT scanning in trauma patients without influencing regular and urgent CT scanning
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)504-509
JournalEuropean Journal of Radiology
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Cite this