A cost comparison of disposable vs reusable instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

被引:29
作者
Demoulin, L [1 ]
Kesteloot, K [1 ]
Penninckx, F [1 ]
机构
[1] DEPT APPL ECON, B-3000 LOUVAIN, BELGIUM
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 1996年 / 10卷 / 05期
关键词
laparoscopic cholecystectomy; cost comparison; reusables; disposables; instruments;
D O I
10.1007/BF00188399
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: This paper compares the costs of disposable and reusable instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: The instrument set considered includes those instruments that are available in both a reusable and disposable form. A market study within the Belgian market was performed in order to compare purchase prices. In addition, costs of cleaning, sterilization, wrapping, maintenance, repair, and disposal of waste were calculated. The effects of reusables and disposables were examined by means of a literature overview. Results: It was calculated that the instrument cost per procedure of a full disposable set is 7.4-27.7 times higher than the cost per procedure with reusables. In comparison with disposables, modular systems (''semidisposable'') and mixed use of disposables and reusables reduce costs, but still the cost per procedure remains higher than with reusables. A sensitivity analysis confirmed that these conclusions are robust to the model assumptions. In addition, the available evidence in the literature suggests that reusables do not compromise patient of staff safety. Conclusions: If reusables are used instead of disposables when performing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy considerable savings can be achieved without compromising patient and staff safety.
引用
收藏
页码:520 / 525
页数:6
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   RETROSPECTIVE AND PROSPECTIVE MULTIINSTITUTIONAL LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY STUDY ORGANIZED BY THE SOCIETY-OF-AMERICAN-GASTROINTESTINAL-ENDOSCOPIC-SURGEONS [J].
AIRAN, M ;
APPEL, M ;
BERCI, G ;
COBURG, AJ ;
COHEN, M ;
CUSCHIERI, A ;
DENT, T ;
DUPPLER, D ;
EASTER, D ;
GREENE, F ;
HALEVEY, A ;
HAMMER, S ;
HUNTER, J ;
JENSON, M ;
KO, ST ;
MCFADYAN, B ;
PERISSAT, J ;
PONSKY, J ;
RAVINDRANATHAN, P ;
SACKIER, JM ;
SOPER, N ;
VANSTIEGMANN, G ;
TRAVERSO, W ;
UDWADIA, T ;
UNGER, S ;
WAHLSTROM, E ;
WOLFE, B .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 1992, 6 (04) :169-176
[2]   REUSABLE INSTRUMENTS ARE MORE COST-EFFECTIVE THAN DISPOSABLE INSTRUMENTS FOR LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY [J].
APELGREN, KN ;
BLANK, ML ;
SLOMSKI, CA ;
HADJIS, NS .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 1994, 8 (01) :32-34
[3]   COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY VERSUS OPEN CHOLECYSTECTOMY [J].
BASS, EB ;
PITT, HA ;
LILLEMOE, KD .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1993, 165 (04) :466-471
[4]   LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY - FROM GIMMICK TO GOLD STANDARD [J].
BEGOS, DG ;
MODLIN, IM .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY, 1994, 19 (04) :325-330
[5]  
*CCOHTA, 1994, REUS MED DEV P OCT 6
[6]  
CORSON SL, 1989, J REPROD MED, V34, P282
[7]  
CRIST DW, 1993, SURG CLIN N AM, V73, P265
[8]   COMPLICATIONS OF LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY - A NATIONAL SURVEY OF 4,292 HOSPITALS AND AN ANALYSIS OF 77,604 CASES [J].
DEZIEL, DJ ;
MILLIKAN, KW ;
ECONOMOU, SG ;
DOOLAS, A ;
KO, ST ;
AIRAN, MC .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1993, 165 (01) :9-14
[9]  
DUPPLER DW, 1992, SURG CLIN N AM, V72, P1021
[10]   COMPARISON OF OPEN AND LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY [J].
GADACZ, TR .
ENDOSCOPY, 1992, 24 (08) :730-732