Experimental Study to Develop a Method for Improving Sample Collection to Monitor Laryngoscopes after Reprocessing

A cost comparison between reusable flexible and disposable laryngoscopes

OBJECTIVES

To compare the costs of disposable laryngoscopes to reusable scopes in outpatient and inpatient settings.

METHODS

The total variable and fixed costs involved in flexible scope reprocessing were collected from two general otolaryngology clinics, a pediatric otolaryngology clinic, and a children's hospital. Variable costs of disposable materials and labor were collected from 65 scope reprocessing events to identify the cost of reprocessing. Fixed costs of scope maintenance, monitors, video towers, and storage equipment were collected from financial records. Fixed and variable costs were analyzed to identify the cost per scope event. The costs were then compared to a theoretical model where disposable scopes were used to meet the volume demands of each clinic and children's hospital setting. The model of disposable scopes was generated after obtaining volume costs specific to each setting from a disposable scope company.

RESULTS

The average cost of a reusable scope model per scope event was $66.02 ± 4.49 at the three clinics and $130.66 at the children's hospital. The average cost of the disposable scope model per scope event was $152.55 ± 0.55 in the three clinics and $172.61 in the children's hospital. The cost differences were $86.53 ± 3.96 and $41.95 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In an outpatient clinic, reusable scopes are less expensive than a disposable scope model. In children's hospital inpatient setting, the difference in costs between disposable and reusable scopes is lower. When considering other non-economic factors, disposable scopes may be a feasible option, especially in the children's hospital setting.

Using Microbiological Sampling to Evaluate the Efficacy of Nasofibroscope Disinfection: The Tristel Trio Wipes System in Ear-Nose-Throat (ENT) Endoscopy

Disinfection and sterilization are needed for guaranteeing that medical and surgical instruments do not spread contagious microorganisms to patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a simple manual technique of high-level disinfection (HLD) of flexible fiberoptic nasofibroscopes (FFNs) with wipes impregnated with a chlorine dioxide solution (Tristel Trio Wipes System—TTW) against a conventional automated washer machine (Soluscope ENT, Cimrex 12—AW). FFNs used in 62 patients undergoing endoscopy at an ENT clinic were sampled according to an aseptic procedure. For each nasoendoscopy, microbiological samples were taken at two times: (1) after a patient’s nasoendoscopy and (2) immediately after high-level disinfection. Ten microliters of each prepared sample were inoculated onto specific culture media for the detection of nasopharyngeal flora microorganisms. The microbiological results obtained from 62 post-disinfection samples revealed bacterial growth on two FFNs disinfected with AW, and five FFNs disinfected with TTW, but this difference is not statistically significant. None of the isolates were pathogenic bacteria. Our results are different than the results obtained by two previously published studies on the TTW system. In both studies, sampling was carried out by swabbing the tip and the handle surface of FFNs. This sampling method was the least effective method means of detecting bacteria on a surface. It can be concluded that the two disinfection systems allow providers to obtain a reduction of the saprophytic and pathogenic microbial load.