Annali di igiene : medicina preventiva e di comunita · 2025
Disposable sheaths use versus instruments reprocessing for nasopharyngolaryngoscopy in ENT-clinic: a cost-minimization analysis.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nurchis Mario Cesare, Gianino Maria Michela, Di Pumpo Marcello, De Vita Vittorio, Moffa Antonio, Giorgi Lucrezia, Sabatino Lorenzo, Sommella Lorenzo, Casale Manuele, Damiani Gianfranco
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Nasopharyngolaryngoscopes reprocessing is often suboptimal and breaches in reprocessing protocols are commonly reported. Single-use sheaths help in reducing endoscope contamination. The aim of the study is to compare costs related to disposable instruments reprocessing and the single-use sheaths alternative.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cost-minimization analysis to compare fiberoptic nasopharyngolaryngoscopy instruments reprocessing with disposable sheaths use was performed through the micro-costing approach with data from teaching hospital and costs in euros referred to 2022, following the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards.
RESULTS: In the base-case scenario, using disposable sheaths costs € 2,600 less than using cleaning and sterilization procedures. The analysis of direct medical costs, which included personnel, equipment and operating costs, and consumables, revealed higher costs related to personnel for the cleaning and sterilization alternative. Sensitivity analysis further supported the robustness of the cost-saving findings, with variations in disposable sheaths cost and sterilization kits demonstrating significant impacts on the cost difference between the two alternatives.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the study findings, this economic analysis shows that using disposable sheaths covering nasopharyngolaryngoscopes is an appropriate cost-saving strategy. Further studies on a larger scale are needed to confirm these encouraging results.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cost-minimization analysis to compare fiberoptic nasopharyngolaryngoscopy instruments reprocessing with disposable sheaths use was performed through the micro-costing approach with data from teaching hospital and costs in euros referred to 2022, following the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards.
RESULTS: In the base-case scenario, using disposable sheaths costs € 2,600 less than using cleaning and sterilization procedures. The analysis of direct medical costs, which included personnel, equipment and operating costs, and consumables, revealed higher costs related to personnel for the cleaning and sterilization alternative. Sensitivity analysis further supported the robustness of the cost-saving findings, with variations in disposable sheaths cost and sterilization kits demonstrating significant impacts on the cost difference between the two alternatives.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the study findings, this economic analysis shows that using disposable sheaths covering nasopharyngolaryngoscopes is an appropriate cost-saving strategy. Further studies on a larger scale are needed to confirm these encouraging results.