Humphries Laura S, Shenaq Deana S, Teven Chad M, Park Julie E, Song David H
Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.; and Department of Plastic Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, D.C.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2018 Jan 11;6(1):e1591. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001591. eCollection 2018 Jan.
We hypothesize that reusable, on-site specialty instrument trays available to plastic surgery residents in the emergency department (ED) for bedside procedures are more cost-effective than disposable on-site and remote re-usable operating room (OR) instruments at our institution.
We completed a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the use of disposable on-site kits and remote OR trays to a hypothetical, custom, reusable tray for ED procedures completed by PRS residents. Material costs of existing OR trays were used to estimate the purchasing and use-cost of a custom on-site tray for the same procedures. Cost of per procedure 'consult time' was estimated using procedure and resident salary.
Sixteen bedside procedures were completed over a 4.5 month period. A mean of 2.14 disposable kits were used per-procedure. Mean consultation time was 1.66 hours. Procedures that used OR trays took 3 times as long as procedures that used on-site kits (4 vs. 1.1 hours). Necessary, additional instruments were unavailable for 75% of procedures. Mean cost of using disposable kits and OR trays was $115.03/procedure versus an estimated $26.67/procedure cost of using a custom tray, yielding $88.36/procedure cost-savings. Purchase of a single custom tray ($1,421.55) would be redeemed after 2.3 weeks at 1 procedure/day. Purchasing 4 trays has projected annual cost-savings of $26,565.20.
The purchase of specialized procedure trays will yield valuable time and cost-savings while providing quality patient care. Improving time efficiency will help achieve the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) goals of maintaining resident well-being and developing quality improvement competency.
我们假设,急诊科(ED)为整形外科住院医师提供的用于床边手术的可重复使用的现场专用器械托盘,比我们机构使用的一次性现场和远程可重复使用的手术室(OR)器械更具成本效益。
我们完成了一项成本效益分析,比较了一次性现场套件和远程手术室托盘与用于整形外科住院医师在急诊科完成手术的假设性定制可重复使用托盘的使用情况。使用现有手术室托盘的材料成本来估算相同手术的定制现场托盘的采购和使用成本。每个手术“会诊时间”的成本使用手术和住院医师工资进行估算。
在4.5个月的时间里完成了16例床边手术。每个手术平均使用2.14个一次性套件。平均会诊时间为1.66小时。使用手术室托盘的手术时间是使用现场套件的手术时间的3倍(4小时对1.1小时)。75%的手术无法获得必要的额外器械。使用一次性套件和手术室托盘的平均成本为每次手术115.03美元,而使用定制托盘的估计成本为每次手术26.67美元,每次手术节省成本88.36美元。购买一个定制托盘(1421.55美元)在每天进行1次手术的情况下,2.3周后即可收回成本。购买4个托盘预计每年可节省成本26565.20美元。
购买专用手术托盘将节省宝贵的时间和成本,同时提供优质的患者护理。提高时间效率将有助于实现研究生医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)维持住院医师健康和培养质量改进能力的目标。