OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost benefits of reusing disposable laparoscopic instruments. DESIGN: A cost-analysis study based on a review of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures performed between August 1990 and January 1994, including analysis of disposable instrument use, purchase records, and reprocessing costs for each instrument. SETTING: The general surgery department of a 461-bed teaching hospital where disposable laparoscopic instruments are routinely reused according to internally validated reprocessing protocols. METHODS: Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic interventions performed between August 1990 and January 1994 for which the number and types of disposable laparoscopic instruments were standardized. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reprocessing cost per instrument, the savings realized by reusing disposable laparoscopic instruments and the cost-efficient number of reuses per instrument. RESULTS: The cost of reprocessing instruments varied from $2.64 (Can) to $4.66 for each disposable laparoscopic instrument. Purchases of 10 commonly reused disposable laparoscopic instruments totalled $183,279, and the total reprocessing cost was estimated at $35,665 for the study period. Not reusing disposable instruments would have cost $527,575 in instrument purchases for the same period. Disposable laparoscopic instruments were reused 1.7 to 68 times each. CONCLUSIONS: Under carefully monitored conditions and strict guidelines, reuse of disposable laparoscopic and thoracoscopic instruments can be cost-effective.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost benefits of reusing disposable laparoscopic instruments. DESIGN: A cost-analysis study based on a review of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures performed between August 1990 and January 1994, including analysis of disposable instrument use, purchase records, and reprocessing costs for each instrument. SETTING: The general surgery department of a 461-bed teaching hospital where disposable laparoscopic instruments are routinely reused according to internally validated reprocessing protocols. METHODS: Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic interventions performed between August 1990 and January 1994 for which the number and types of disposable laparoscopic instruments were standardized. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reprocessing cost per instrument, the savings realized by reusing disposable laparoscopic instruments and the cost-efficient number of reuses per instrument. RESULTS: The cost of reprocessing instruments varied from $2.64 (Can) to $4.66 for each disposable laparoscopic instrument. Purchases of 10 commonly reused disposable laparoscopic instruments totalled $183,279, and the total reprocessing cost was estimated at $35,665 for the study period. Not reusing disposable instruments would have cost $527,575 in instrument purchases for the same period. Disposable laparoscopic instruments were reused 1.7 to 68 times each. CONCLUSIONS: Under carefully monitored conditions and strict guidelines, reuse of disposable laparoscopic and thoracoscopic instruments can be cost-effective.