Patient Scheduling System for Medical Treatment Using Genetic Algorithm
Main Article Content
Keywords
genetic algorithm, rTMS, list scheduling, partially mapped crossover
Abstract
The manual scheduling of medical treatment in a health center is a complex, time consuming, and error prone task. The system takes into account various constraints such as patient preferences, physician availability, and resource allocation. The GA is used to optimize the scheduling of patients to physicians and to allocate resources to minimize the waiting time. The proposed system is tested using real-world data, and the results demonstrate that it can effectively reduce the total waiting time of patients and improve the efficiency of healthcare providers. This study contributes to the optimization of patient scheduling systems in the healthcare industry, and provides a valuable tool for healthcare providers to improve patient satisfaction and operational efficiency. Furthermore, there is no guarantee a manually generated schedule maximizes the operational efficiency of the center. Scheduling problems have seen extensive research across several domains. The current work presents a novel genetic algorithm for the scheduling of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) appointments.
References
2. Braaksma, A., Kortbeek, N., Post, G., & Nollet, F. (2014). Integral multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment planning. Operations Research for Health Care, 3(3), 145–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.orhc.2014.02.001.
3. Petrovic, S., Leung, W., Song, X., & Sundar, S. (2006). Algorithms for radiotherapy treatment booking. In 25th Workshop of the UK planning and scheduling special interest group (pp. 105–112).
4. Podgorelec, V., & Kokol, P. (1997). Genetic algorithm-based system for patient scheduling in highly constrained situations. Journal of Medical Systems, 21(6), 417–427.
5. Golgoun, A. S., & Sepidnam, G. (2018). The optimized algorithm for prioritizing and scheduling of patient appointment at a health center according to the highest rating in waiting queue. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 7, 240–245.
6. Petrovic, D., Morshed, M., & Petrovic, S. (2011). Multi-objective genetic algorithms for scheduling of radiotherapy treatments for categorized cancer patients. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(6), 6994–7002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010. 12.015.
7. Chien, C.-F., Tseng, F.-P., & Chen, C.-H. (2008). An evolutionary approach to rehabilitation patient scheduling: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research, 189(3), 1234–1253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.062.
8. Aickelin, U., & Dowsland, K. A. (2004). An indirect genetic algorithm for a nurse scheduling problem. Computers & Operations Research, 31(5), 761–778. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/s0305-0548(03)00034-0.
9. Jiang, Y., Abouee-Mehrizi, H., & Diao, Y. (2020). Data-driven analytics to support scheduling of multi-priority multi-class patients with wait time targets. European Journal of Operational Research, 281(3), 597–611. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor. 2018.05.017.
10. Lipowski, A., & Lipowska, D. (2012). Roulette-wheel selection via stochastic acceptance. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 391(6), 2193–2196. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2011.12.004.
11. Dai, J., Geng, N., & Xie, X. (2021). Dynamic advance scheduling of outpatient appointments in a moving booking window. European Journal of Operational Research, 292(2), 622–632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.11.030.
12. Ak, B., & Koc, E. (2012). A guide for genetic algorithm based on parallel machine scheduling and flexible job-shop scheduling. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 62, 817–823. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.138.
13. Berlim, M. T., Fleck, M. P., & Turecki, G. (2008). Current trends in the assessment and somatic treatment of resistant/refractory major depression: An overview. Annals of Medicine, 40(2), 149–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07853890701769728.
14. Sauré, A., & Puterman, M. L. (2014). The appointment scheduling game. INFORMS Transactions on Education, 14(2), 73–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/ited.2013.0119
15. Graham, R. L. (1969). Bounds on multiprocessing timing anomalies. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 17(2), 416–429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/0117039
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.