Single-use versus reusable rhinolaryngoscopes for inpatient otorhinolaryngology consults: Resident and patient experience

被引:0
作者
Bowen, Andrew Jay [1 ]
Macielak, Robert James [2 ]
Fussell, Wanda [2 ]
Yeakel, Sarah [3 ]
Mcmillan, Ryan [2 ]
Goates, Andrew [2 ]
Awadallah, Andrew [2 ]
Ekbom, Dale C. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin Madison, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Dept Surg, Div Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Madison, WI USA
[2] Mayo Clin, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Rochester, MN USA
[3] Mayo Clin, Dept Orthoped Surg, Rochester, MN USA
[4] Mayo Clin ENT, Dept Otorhinolaryngol, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55902 USA
来源
LARYNGOSCOPE INVESTIGATIVE OTOLARYNGOLOGY | 2024年 / 9卷 / 01期
关键词
endoscopy; nasopharyngoscopy; rhinolaryngoscopy; single-use;
D O I
10.1002/lio2.1203
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
Objectives: Single-use rhinolaryngoscopes were brought to market in 2019 as an alternative to traditional reusable scopes and have garnered interest across settings given portability and potential cost advantages. While single-use was previously evaluated compared to traditional devices, the overall impact to the consult experience for both users and patients has not been captured.Methods: Eighteen residents performed consults with both single-use and reusable rhinolaryngoscope systems on alternating weeks. A five-question cumulative survey administered across three assessment points over a 12-week period using a five-point rating system to rate favorability. Residents and patients also completed four-point scale surveys following procedure(s) to capture the consult experience. Statistical analyses were performed to measure significance differences between survey responses between the two systems.Results: Single-use rhinolaryngoscopes received higher overall ratings compared with reusables across each metric captured including overall consult time (4.3 vs. 2.2, p < .001), multiscope consults (4.4 vs. 3.1, p < .001), patient communication (4.6 vs. 2.1, p < .001), teaching opportunities (4.6 vs. 2.1, p < .001), and overall ease of use (4.7 vs. 2.6, p < .001). Residents rated single-use higher than reusable after each procedure in terms of ease of use (1.07 vs. 2.68, p < .001) and visual clarity (1.27 vs. 1.89, p = .003), while patients rated single-use higher for understanding of illness (3.9 vs. 3.1, p < .001) and understanding of treatment rationale (3.9 vs. 3.1, p < .001).Conclusion: Resident and patient experience feedback favored single-use rhinolaryngoscopes compared to reusable scope technology across multiple surveyed measurables. Single-use rhinolaryngoscopes provide a viable tool for otorhinolaryngologist and other clinicians to perform rhinolaryngoscopy consults.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [31] How to choose between single-use and reusable medical materials for sustainable nursing: Methodological lessons learned from a national study
    Vanderwee, Katrien
    Demarre, Liesbet
    Malfait, Simon
    Kieckens, Evelien
    De Waegemaeker, Pascal
    Duprez, Veerle
    Fraeyman, Norbert
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2024,
  • [32] A Micro-costing Analysis of Single-use and Reusable Flexible Bronchoscope Usage in the Bronchoscopy Service at A Tertiary Care University Hospital
    Flandes, Javier
    Gimenez, Andres
    Alvarez, Susana
    Giraldo-Cadavid, Luis F.
    JOURNAL OF BRONCHOLOGY & INTERVENTIONAL PULMONOLOGY, 2025, 32 (02)
  • [33] Comparison Between Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscope and Reusable Flexible Ureteroscope for Upper Urinary Calculi: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Meng, Chunyang
    Peng, Lei
    Li, Jinze
    Li, Yunxiang
    Li, Jinming
    Wu, Ji
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2021, 8
  • [34] Single-Use vs. Reusable Digital Flexible Ureteroscope to Treat Upper Urinary Calculi: A Propensity-Score Matching Analysis
    Huang, Fang
    Zhang, Xiaoqiong
    Cui, Yu
    Zhu, Zewu
    Li, Yongchao
    Chen, Jinbo
    Zeng, Feng
    Li, Yang
    Chen, Zhiyong
    Chen, Hequn
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2022, 8
  • [35] The efficacy and safety of three different single-use ureteroscopes in retrograde intrarenal surgery: a comparative analysis of a single surgeon's experience in a single center
    Sahin, Mehmet Fatih
    Topkac, Erdem Can
    Seramet, Serkan
    Dogan, Cagri
    Yazici, Cenk Murat
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 42 (01)
  • [36] Initial experience of comparison between two slimmest single-use flexible ureteroscopes: Indoscope Sleek (Bioradmedisys™) Versus Uscope PU3033A (Pusen™): A single-center prospective study
    Shashank Agrawal
    Pavan Survase
    Abhishek G. Singh
    Arvind P. Ganpule
    Ravindra B. Sabnis
    Mahesh R. Desai
    World Journal of Urology, 2023, 41 : 2817 - 2821
  • [37] Initial experience of comparison between two slimmest single-use flexible ureteroscopes: Indoscope Sleek (Bioradmedisys™) Versus Uscope PU3033A (Pusen™): A single-center prospective study
    Agrawal, Shashank
    Survase, Pavan
    Singh, Abhishek G.
    Ganpule, Arvind P.
    Sabnis, Ravindra B.
    Desai, Mahesh R.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 41 (10) : 2817 - 2821
  • [38] Can a Single-Use and Patient-Specific Instrumentation Be Reliably Used in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Multicenter Controlled Study
    Abane, Laurent
    Zaoui, Amine
    Anract, Philippe
    Lefevre, Nicolas
    Herman, Serge
    Hamadouche, Moussa
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2018, 33 (07) : 2111 - 2118
  • [39] WiScope® single use digital flexible ureteroscope versus reusable flexible ureteroscope for management of renal stones: a prospective randomized study
    Ali, Ahmed, I
    Eldakhakhny, Amr
    Abdelfadel, Abdelsalam
    Rohiem, Mahmoud F.
    Elbadry, Mohamed
    Hassan, Ali
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 40 (09) : 2323 - 2330
  • [40] WiScope® single use digital flexible ureteroscope versus reusable flexible ureteroscope for management of renal stones: a prospective randomized study
    Ahmed I. Ali
    Amr Eldakhakhny
    Abdelsalam Abdelfadel
    Mahmoud F. Rohiem
    Mohamed Elbadry
    Ali Hassan
    World Journal of Urology, 2022, 40 : 2323 - 2330