Literature DB >> 10699767

A performance, safety and cost comparison of reusable and disposable endoscopic biopsy forceps: a prospective, randomized trial.

J Rizzo1, D Bernstein, F Gress.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many gastroenterologists believe that disposable forceps are more expensive than reusable forceps. It has been shown, however, that cross contamination and spread of infection are possible with reusable forceps. We conducted a prospective, randomized study to evaluate the performance, safety and cost of reusable versus disposable biopsy forceps.
METHODS: Endoscopists were randomly assigned reusable or disposable biopsy forceps during upper and lower endoscopy. Forceps were evaluated for ease of passage through the endoscope, ease of opening and closing, adequacy of sample, and overall evaluation following the endoscopy using an ordinal scale. The cost per biopsy session was calculated using the following formula: (Acquisition cost + Reprocessing costs)/Number of biopsy sessions.
RESULTS: Disposable forceps received a predominantly excellent rating versus a predominantly good rating for reusable forceps. Disposable forceps were also found to be more cost-effective than reusable forceps with an average savings of $5. 94 per biopsy session. Examination of reusable forceps revealed residual patient debris despite "adequate" cleansing.
CONCLUSIONS: Disposable forceps outperformed reusable forceps and were found to be more cost-effective. Residual patient debris on reusable forceps may pose a risk of cross contamination and the spread of infection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10699767     DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(00)70351-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of air-coupled balloon esophageal and anorectal manometry catheters with solid-state esophageal manometry and water-perfused anorectal manometry catheters.

Authors:  John C Fang; Kristen Hilden; Ashok K Tuteja; Kathryn A Peterson
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  One bite or two? A prospective trial comparing colonoscopy biopsy technique in patients with chronic ulcerative colitis.

Authors:  Lawrence C Hookey; David J Hurlbut; Andrew G Day; Paul N Manley; William T Depew
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.522

3.  Single-use versus reusable medical devices in spinal fusion surgery: a hospital micro-costing analysis.

Authors:  C Bouthors; J Nguyen; L Durand; A Dubory; S Raspaud; Ch Court
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-07-26

4.  Comparison of sterilization of reusable endoscopic biopsy forceps by autoclaving and ethylene oxide gas.

Authors:  Jai Hoon Yoon; Byung Chul Yoon; Hang Lak Lee; Jun Kyu Lee; Yong-Tae Kim; Dong Ho Lee; Il Ju Choi; Don Haeng Lee; Dong Hee Kim
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Prospective, randomized, pathologist-blinded study of disposable alligator-jaw biopsy forceps for gastric mucosal biopsy.

Authors:  S Abudayyeh; J Hoffman; H T El-Zimaity; D Y Graham
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 4.088

6.  Performance and cost of disposable biopsy forceps in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: comparison with reusable biopsy forceps.

Authors:  Chul-Hyun Lim; Myung-Gyu Choi; Won Chul Kim; Jin Soo Kim; Yu Kyung Cho; Jae Myung Park; In Seok Lee; Sang Woo Kim; Kyu Yong Choi; In-Sik Chung
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2012-03-31

7.  Evaluating Quality and Adequacy of Gastrointestinal Samples Collected using Reusable or Disposable Forceps.

Authors:  J A Cartwright; T L Hill; S Smith; D Shaw
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2016-06-03       Impact factor: 3.333

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.