The panel's report will go to Acting Director-general Andrew Bridgman after the draft is checked for accuracy by the South Island health boards behind closed doors.
Given the amount of public involvement in the issue, it was clear some time ago that meeting the original October 15 deadline would be tight so Mrs Kolbe's announcement was not unexpected.
The panel, which also involves Adelaide neurosurgeon Glenn McCulloch and consumer advocate David Russell, has been reviewing neurosurgery services in the South Island after district health boards were unable to reach agreement on the configuration of a future regional service.
Canterbury wants all six neurosurgeons in such a service living in Christchurch with all surgery done there and only outpatient clinics in other places, while the Southern board wants a two-site option with neurosurgery continuing in Dunedin with resident specialists.
The retention of services in Dunedin has been supported by thousands of Otago and Southland people in a campaign supported by the Otago Daily Times, the Southland Times, community newspapers, local radio and a Keep Neurosurgery in Dunedin facebook site.
A petition calling for the retention of services in Dunedin was signed by 55,741 people and is under consideration by Parliament's health select committee.
Mrs Kolbe said the panel was beginning to come to a view on the shape of a future service, but needed to confirm information with the district health boards to ensure there was general agreement over its accuracy.
"Before we conclude our report, we want to talk to the Canterbury and Southern DHBs again and we are also yet to meet clinicians and senior management from the South Canterbury and Nelson Marlborough DHBs".
No dates for the meetings have been announced.
Mrs Kolbe said the panel had been very conscious people wanted a resolution to this issue as quickly as possible, "but we want to ensure we provide a robust report and at the same time continue to interact with the South Island DHBs in a respectful manner, so we have asked for just a little more time", she said.
It is understood those who have referred to governance of the new service in their submissions to the panel have indicated that independence is important.
No indication has been given on when a decision from Mr Bridgman is expected and it is only when he makes his announcement that the panel's report will be made public.
The panel's terms of reference state his decision will be final, but the legal questions around this remain.
Associate director of the New Zealand centre for public law at Victoria University Dean Knight has described the process as "Mickey Mouse".
Without some documentation from the boards to show that they were giving their decision-making function to Mr Bridgman (something which would need approval from the Minister of Health) there was a risk it could be legally challenged.
There was a reasonable likelihood that courts would not be "that impressed" with the piecemeal and uncertain process which appeared to have been adopted.
It is understood none of the South Island boards has passed any resolutions seeking to give Mr Bridgman binding power on the issue.
