Literature DB >> 29054303

Cost Savings of Standardization of Thoracic Surgical Instruments: The Process of Lean.

Kyle H Cichos1, Paul L Linsky1, Benjamin Wei1, Douglas J Minnich1, Robert J Cerfolio2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Our objective is to show the effect that standardization of surgical trays has on the number of instruments sterilized and on cost.
METHODS: We reviewed our most commonly used surgical trays with the 3 general thoracic surgeons in our division and agreed upon the least number of surgical instruments needed for mediastinoscopy, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, robotic thoracic surgery, and thoracotomy.
RESULTS: We removed 59 of 79 instruments (75%) from the mediastinoscopy tray, 45 of 73 (62%) from the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery tray, 51 of 84 (61%) from the robotic tray, and 50 of 113 (44%) from the thoracotomy tray. From January 2016 to December 2016, the estimated savings by procedure were video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (n = 398) $21,890, robotic tray (n = 231) $19,400, thoracotomy (n = 163) $15,648, and mediastinoscopy (n = 162) $12,474. Estimated total savings were $69,412. The weight of the trays was reduced 70%, and the nonsteamed sterilization rate (opened trays that needed to be reprocessed) decreased from 2% to 0%. None of the surgeons requested any of the removed instruments.
CONCLUSIONS: Standardization of thoracic surgical trays is possible despite having multiple thoracic surgeons. This process of lean (the removal of nonvalue steps or equipment) reduces the number of instruments cleaned and carried and reduces cost. It may also reduce the incidence of "wet loads" that require the resterilization of instruments.
Copyright © 2017 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29054303     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.06.064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  7 in total

1.  Effects of a Surgical Receipt Program on the Supply Costs of Five General Surgery Procedures.

Authors:  Beiqun Zhao; Griffin A Tyree; Timothy C Lin; Florin Vaida; Blake J Stock; Thomas A Hamelin; Bryan M Clary
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2018-12-13       Impact factor: 2.192

2.  Who really benefits from surgical tray reduction?

Authors:  Ava John-Baptiste
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Process optimization in total knee arthoplasty procedures : Impact of size-specific instrument sets on costs and revenue.

Authors:  Maximilian C von Eiff; Wilfried von Eiff; Andreas Roth; Mohamed Ghanem
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Measuring intraoperative surgical instrument use with radio-frequency identification.

Authors:  Ian Hill; Lindsey Olivere; Joshua Helmkamp; Elliot Le; Westin Hill; John Wahlstedt; Phillip Khoury; Jared Gloria; Marc J Richard; Laura H Rosenberger; Patrick J Codd
Journal:  JAMIA Open       Date:  2022-01-19

5.  Optimizing the surgical instrument tray to immediately increase efficiency and lower costs in the operating room.

Authors:  Jay Toor; Avneesh Bhangu; Jesse Wolfstadt; Garry Bassi; Stanley Chung; Raja Rampersaud; William Mitchell; Joseph Milner; Martin Koyle
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 6.  Standardization of Procedures to Contain Cost and Reduce Variability of Care After the Pandemic.

Authors:  Federico Raveglia; Riccardo Orlandi; Arianna Rimessi; Fabrizio Minervini; Ugo Cioffi; Matilde De Simone; Angelo Guttadauro; Marco Scarci
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2021-06-24

Review 7.  Approaches to the rationalization of surgical instrument trays: scoping review and research agenda.

Authors:  Bruno Miranda Dos Santos; Flavio Sanson Fogliatto; Carolina Melecardi Zani; Fernanda Araujo Pimentel Peres
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 2.655

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.