Advantages of disposable endoscopic accessories

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Disposable devices offer greater variety, complexity, and perhaps utility than the reusable alternatives. Most disposable accessories carry a cost burden, which may indeed be acceptable when the devices are difficult to reprocess, when they incorporate features that justify the added cost, or when their unit cost approaches purchase plus reprocessing costs for reusable alternatives, such as for biopsy forceps. The non financial benefits of reliability, sustained quality, and reduced liability may be dominant considerations in some settings or for some items. Reusable accessories tend to be cost-effective alternatives, provided reliable reprocessing facilities and processes are available and the procedural volume is adequate to make a difference. The practical decisions regarding use of disposable versus reusable accessories, or combinations of the two, require local assessment of volumes, convenience, reimbursement success, and storage and reprocessing abilities. Which approach is most cost effective for a given unit, or for an individual device, may vary depending on use patterns, volumes, and negotiated prices. Units with small volumes may prefer the ease of disposable accessories independent of relative cost issues, whereas large high-volume units may need to evaluate cost data more carefully to maintain sustainable practices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)341-348
Number of pages8
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America
Volume10
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2000

Fingerprint

Costs and Cost Analysis
Equipment and Supplies
Surgical Instruments
Biopsy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Advantages of disposable endoscopic accessories. / Petersen, Bret Thomas.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2000, p. 341-348.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{48438b7b881a4fe2ad11322050ec8393,
title = "Advantages of disposable endoscopic accessories",
abstract = "Disposable devices offer greater variety, complexity, and perhaps utility than the reusable alternatives. Most disposable accessories carry a cost burden, which may indeed be acceptable when the devices are difficult to reprocess, when they incorporate features that justify the added cost, or when their unit cost approaches purchase plus reprocessing costs for reusable alternatives, such as for biopsy forceps. The non financial benefits of reliability, sustained quality, and reduced liability may be dominant considerations in some settings or for some items. Reusable accessories tend to be cost-effective alternatives, provided reliable reprocessing facilities and processes are available and the procedural volume is adequate to make a difference. The practical decisions regarding use of disposable versus reusable accessories, or combinations of the two, require local assessment of volumes, convenience, reimbursement success, and storage and reprocessing abilities. Which approach is most cost effective for a given unit, or for an individual device, may vary depending on use patterns, volumes, and negotiated prices. Units with small volumes may prefer the ease of disposable accessories independent of relative cost issues, whereas large high-volume units may need to evaluate cost data more carefully to maintain sustainable practices.",
author = "Petersen, {Bret Thomas}",
year = "2000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "341--348",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America",
issn = "1052-5157",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Advantages of disposable endoscopic accessories

AU - Petersen, Bret Thomas

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - Disposable devices offer greater variety, complexity, and perhaps utility than the reusable alternatives. Most disposable accessories carry a cost burden, which may indeed be acceptable when the devices are difficult to reprocess, when they incorporate features that justify the added cost, or when their unit cost approaches purchase plus reprocessing costs for reusable alternatives, such as for biopsy forceps. The non financial benefits of reliability, sustained quality, and reduced liability may be dominant considerations in some settings or for some items. Reusable accessories tend to be cost-effective alternatives, provided reliable reprocessing facilities and processes are available and the procedural volume is adequate to make a difference. The practical decisions regarding use of disposable versus reusable accessories, or combinations of the two, require local assessment of volumes, convenience, reimbursement success, and storage and reprocessing abilities. Which approach is most cost effective for a given unit, or for an individual device, may vary depending on use patterns, volumes, and negotiated prices. Units with small volumes may prefer the ease of disposable accessories independent of relative cost issues, whereas large high-volume units may need to evaluate cost data more carefully to maintain sustainable practices.

AB - Disposable devices offer greater variety, complexity, and perhaps utility than the reusable alternatives. Most disposable accessories carry a cost burden, which may indeed be acceptable when the devices are difficult to reprocess, when they incorporate features that justify the added cost, or when their unit cost approaches purchase plus reprocessing costs for reusable alternatives, such as for biopsy forceps. The non financial benefits of reliability, sustained quality, and reduced liability may be dominant considerations in some settings or for some items. Reusable accessories tend to be cost-effective alternatives, provided reliable reprocessing facilities and processes are available and the procedural volume is adequate to make a difference. The practical decisions regarding use of disposable versus reusable accessories, or combinations of the two, require local assessment of volumes, convenience, reimbursement success, and storage and reprocessing abilities. Which approach is most cost effective for a given unit, or for an individual device, may vary depending on use patterns, volumes, and negotiated prices. Units with small volumes may prefer the ease of disposable accessories independent of relative cost issues, whereas large high-volume units may need to evaluate cost data more carefully to maintain sustainable practices.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034066645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034066645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10683219

AN - SCOPUS:0034066645

VL - 10

SP - 341

EP - 348

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America

SN - 1052-5157

IS - 2

ER -