On the FTE-correct metric — hygiene visits per hygienist per day — Park Column GP offices rose +1.9% YTD while a comparable, data-cleaned baseline of non-Park-Column offices declined −2.4%: a +4.3pp relative edge. Directionally positive — enough to justify driving adoption now.
What the Park Column is meant to do. When an appointment isn’t confirmed ~24 hours out, the office moves it into a “park” column and backfills the freed slot — the goal is to stop losing hygiene chair time to broken appointments. If it works, a rollout office gets more completed hygiene visits out of each hygienist day than an office without the column.
Why per-hygienist, and why a baseline. Dividing by office operating days inflates the instant an office adds a hygienist, so we use visits per hygienist-day (completed hygiene visits ÷ hygienist days worked) — the SGA East metric. We compared the 47 Park Column GP offices against the Active GP West offices that never rolled out the column, same periods, as a difference-in-differences. Gage Dental Group was excluded for a data-integrity issue (hygiene visits with no hygienist-days), leaving a clean control of 26.
What we found. Per hygienist-day, Park Column GP went 5.83 → 5.94 YTD (+1.9%) while the clean control went 6.26 → 6.11 (−2.4%) — a +4.3pp relative edge; May was +0.4pp. The cohorts now sit at comparable levels (~5.9 vs ~6.1), so the difference-in-differences is a fair read rather than an artifact of two different populations.
On reporting vs usage. We split the rollout offices by daily-form submissions, but that measures reporting diligence, not column use — an important distinction Karen flagged. Regular reporters +1.2%, occasional +0.2%, dormant +5.4%; correlation with results −0.14. Read correctly, this says self-reporting doesn’t track outcomes — not that the column is idle at non-reporting offices. We have no true usage signal yet.
Bottom line. On the FTE-correct metric and a cleaned, comparable baseline, Park Column offices are ahead +4.3pp year-to-date. It’s observational — to make it airtight we’d want real usage data and a same-ROD matched control — but the direction is positive, and the lever now is adoption: get every office actually working the column.
| Cohort | Offices | YTD ’25 | YTD ’26 | YTD Δ | May ’25 | May ’26 | May Δ |
|---|
| Office | ROD | May ’25 | May ’26 | May Δ | YTD ’25 | YTD ’26 | YTD Δ |
|---|
| ROD | Offices | May ’25 | May ’26 | May Δ | YTD ’25 | YTD ’26 | YTD Δ |
|---|
Karen asked whether hygiene visits per day actually improved at the 56 SGA West offices that rolled out the Park Column — measured from the PBI, because the offices won’t keep the manual daily form (22% form compliance). This is the SGA West parallel to the SGA East risk-score readout.
Hygiene Visits per Hygienist-Day = completed hygiene visits ÷ hygienist days worked, per office per period.
[Completed Visits] filtered to providers where User Type = "HYG".[Work Days] filtered to User Type = "HYG": the FTE denominator. This normalizes for headcount — an office that added a hygienist (3 in ’25 → 4 in ’26) no longer looks busier just for the extra body. Matches SGA East’s “Appointments ÷ Days Worked”.May 2026 vs May 2025 (last year), and YTD Jan–May 2026 vs YTD Jan–May 2025. Park Column went live Oct/Nov 2025, so YTD captures pre- and post-launch on the 2026 side.
Gen4 / SGA West Power BI dataset (Appointments + Providers + Date), queried directly via Service Principal. 120 West locations available; the 56 live Park Column offices were matched by practice name to the PBI location dimension.
To separate the Park Column from network-wide trends, we ran the identical per-hygienist-day metric for the Active GP West offices that never rolled out the column, over the same periods. Data-integrity exclusion: Gage Dental Group reported 11,413 hygiene visits with zero hygienist-days in the PBI (a provider-coding issue), which is uncomputable per-hygienist and had inflated the raw control to ~7.9; it is excluded, leaving a clean control of 26. Result: Park Column GP +1.9% YTD vs control −2.4% — a +4.3pp difference-in-differences edge; May +0.4pp. After the cleanup the cohorts sit at comparable levels (~5.9 vs ~6.1 visits/hygienist-day), so the comparison is fair rather than an artifact of two different populations.
We split the 47 GP rollout offices by the Implementation Tracker’s daily-form submission count: Regular (10+), Occasional (1–9), Dormant (0). Important: submissions measure reporting diligence, not column usage — an office can run the Park Column every day and simply not send the summary. On the per-hygienist-day metric the tiers show no dose-response (regular +1.2%, occasional +0.2%, dormant +5.4% YTD; correlation −0.14). The correct reading is that self-reporting doesn’t track outcomes — not that the column is idle at non-reporting offices. We have no true usage signal; closing that visibility gap (RODs + ideally CDT-level data) is the next step.
Hygiene VpD moves for reasons beyond the Park Column (provider staffing, demand, schedule template). This shows whether throughput moved in the right direction in the rollout offices — it is not a clean attribution of the column alone. Same caveat flagged for SGA East: without CDT-level appointment data we can’t yet prove the office moved the right appointments.