The Laryngoscope · 2017
The cost of being clean: A cost analysis of nasopharyngoscope reprocessing techniques.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Sowerby Leigh J, Rudmik Luke
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Nasopharyngoscopes are an essential instrument to otolaryngologists; reprocessing them in a high-value manner is paramount. Although several different techniques for reprocessing exist, all methods yield similar effectiveness. Given equivalent effectiveness outcomes, a cost analysis of four nasopharyngoscope reprocessing techniques was performed.
STUDY DESIGN: Cost-minimization analysis.
METHODS: Four techniques were evaluated: 1) an automated reprocessor using peracetic acid (Steris System 1; Steris Canada Inc., Mississauga, Canada), 2) an automated reprocessor using ortho-phthalaldehyde (OPA) (Cidex OPA; Advanced Sterilization Products, Johnson and Johnson Inc., Markham, Canada), 3) a manually performed accelerated hydrogen peroxide bath (Revital-Ox; Steris Canada Inc.), and 4) a chlorine dioxide wipe (Tristel Trio Wipes System; Tristel plc, Cambridgeshire, U.K.). The costing perspective was a third-party payer that was adjusted to 2014 Canadian dollars. The base-case scenario used an annual volume of 4,153 reprocessing events in a tertiary care setting, and a scenario analysis assessed the impact of volume and capital expense.
RESULTS: The cost per reprocessing event for the Steris (Steris Canada Inc.) automated endoscope reprocessing, Cidex OPA (Advanced Sterilization Products), Revital-Ox (Steris Canada Inc.), and Tristel Trio Wipes (Tristel plc) were $20.58, $14.20, $9.57, and $13.14, respectively. Scenario analysis demonstrated the Tristel Trio Wipes System (Tristel plc) was the least expensive method in practices with low reprocessing volumes (a threshold of less than 6 events per day, or 22 per week), whereas the Revital-Ox (Steris Canada Inc.) system was least expensive at higher volumes and became substantially more so as volumes increased.
CONCLUSION: A manual accelerated hydrogen peroxide bath offers the least costly approach to nasopharyngoscope reprocessing. The convenience and portability of the Tristel Trio (Tristel plc) system may be a good alternative for low reprocessing volumes, or when rapid turnaround is necessary.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA. Laryngoscope, 128:64-71, 2018.
STUDY DESIGN: Cost-minimization analysis.
METHODS: Four techniques were evaluated: 1) an automated reprocessor using peracetic acid (Steris System 1; Steris Canada Inc., Mississauga, Canada), 2) an automated reprocessor using ortho-phthalaldehyde (OPA) (Cidex OPA; Advanced Sterilization Products, Johnson and Johnson Inc., Markham, Canada), 3) a manually performed accelerated hydrogen peroxide bath (Revital-Ox; Steris Canada Inc.), and 4) a chlorine dioxide wipe (Tristel Trio Wipes System; Tristel plc, Cambridgeshire, U.K.). The costing perspective was a third-party payer that was adjusted to 2014 Canadian dollars. The base-case scenario used an annual volume of 4,153 reprocessing events in a tertiary care setting, and a scenario analysis assessed the impact of volume and capital expense.
RESULTS: The cost per reprocessing event for the Steris (Steris Canada Inc.) automated endoscope reprocessing, Cidex OPA (Advanced Sterilization Products), Revital-Ox (Steris Canada Inc.), and Tristel Trio Wipes (Tristel plc) were $20.58, $14.20, $9.57, and $13.14, respectively. Scenario analysis demonstrated the Tristel Trio Wipes System (Tristel plc) was the least expensive method in practices with low reprocessing volumes (a threshold of less than 6 events per day, or 22 per week), whereas the Revital-Ox (Steris Canada Inc.) system was least expensive at higher volumes and became substantially more so as volumes increased.
CONCLUSION: A manual accelerated hydrogen peroxide bath offers the least costly approach to nasopharyngoscope reprocessing. The convenience and portability of the Tristel Trio (Tristel plc) system may be a good alternative for low reprocessing volumes, or when rapid turnaround is necessary.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA. Laryngoscope, 128:64-71, 2018.