Beleg.

13:22 Aug 28, 2011 

I did find a few references to incision-to-closure time. Have you come across skin-to-skin more often?

23:59 Aug 27, 2011 

common English usage is skin-to-skin.

22:10 Aug 27, 2011 

Glad you found a solution you are happy with. :-)

22:08 Aug 27, 2011 

Thanks a lot for your help! You put me on the right track. I kep digging and actually found two more possible options, they are very similar to your suggestion.

REGULAR BLOCK TIME

The term “regular block time” refers to a surgeon’s allocated OR time for performing elective cases. We use the term “overflow block time” for OR time for all those cases of the surgeon’s group that cannot be performed in the regular block time of each surgeon in the group.

ALLOCATED BLOCK TIME

Scheduling surgical time is allotted in block segments by surgeon or service. All surgical procedures will be scheduled into allocated block times. Cases, which exceed the available block time, must be placed on-call.

http://www.rhodeislandhospital.org/rih/services/surgery/tech...

So I think I am going to use allocated block time for the first one, and incision-to-closure time for the second one.

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

18:01 Aug 27, 2011 

was just trying to assist in clearing your doubts and finding out what your authors are referring to.
Translations, I think, could be something like a) OP room blocked from/to; b) actual duration of operation (incision to closure) from/to

17:54 Aug 27, 2011 

Maybe target overall duration?

I think I am being too meticulous here :), but I just want to make sure that this makes sense.

17:40 Aug 27, 2011 

I guess not, if it's just the protocol you are to translate.
But still, I think your explanation might work. Which means it's not "gross/net" which is listed but "target/actual" durations. Right?

17:38 Aug 27, 2011 

Can you tell from the rest of the document whether this is a problem they are addressing?

17:36 Aug 27, 2011 

The only thing is that the the end time of OP-Raum Beleg. is earlier than Schnitt-Naht (it ends a few minutes before). That is another inconsistency, which was puzzling me. The only explanation I have for that is that possibly the room was reserved for that amount of time, but the surgery took a little bit longer. What do you think?

17:31 Aug 27, 2011 

By googling "Schnitt-Naht" I found that the duration of an operation is sometimes referred to as "Schnitt-Naht-Zeit" (see, e.g., this page: http://www.uni-kiel.de/orthop/hueftproth.html).
So it looks as though in your table they distinguish between a) the net duration of an operation (Schnitt-Naht-Zeit); and 2) the overall duration for which the OP room is blocked.

15:59 Aug 27, 2011 

why I am confused here. I was also thinking that this is Belegung, but, just as you pointed it out, they seem to refer to different things. They ARE all in the same table.


OP-Phase OP-Raum Beleg. Von... Bis... Dauer
OP-Phase Schnitt-Naht Von... Bis.. Dauer

15:27 Aug 27, 2011 

this is all about "phases"? Because the way these terms are listed it looks like they refer to three different things: the operation phase, the operation room, and the room allocation schedule (in which case "Beleg." would be short for "Belegung"). Could that be possible? Do these terms appear in a table?