Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Utilization fraction of rhinoplasty instrument sets: Model for efficient use of surgical instruments.
Gidumal, Sunder; Gray, Mingyang; Oh, Samuel; Hirsch, Matthew; Rousso, Joseph; Rosenberg, Joshua.
Affiliation
  • Gidumal S; Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Mount Sinai Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, United States of America. Electronic address: sunder.gidumal@gmail.com.
  • Gray M; Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Mount Sinai Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, United States of America.
  • Oh S; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, United States of America.
  • Hirsch M; Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Mount Sinai Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, United States of America.
  • Rousso J; Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Mount Sinai Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, United States of America.
  • Rosenberg J; Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Mount Sinai Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, United States of America.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 42(1): 102764, 2021.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33096338
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Recognize the avoidable costs incurred due to overpacking of rhinoplasty instrument trays. Reduce rhinoplasty instrument trays by including only instruments used frequently. Establish methods to reduce trays prepared for other otolaryngologic procedures.

METHODS:

This is a prospective study. The study evaluates the specific use of instruments opened for rhinoplasty procedures at the New York Eye & Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai. Instruments were counted in 10 rhinoplasty cases. Usage rate was calculated for each instrument. Additionally, all instruments used in at least 20% of cases were noted. This "20%" threshold was used to create new rhinoplasty tray inventories more reflective of actual instrument usage. Some instruments above the 20% threshold were included in multiples (i.e. two Adson Brown forceps vs. one curved iris scissor).

RESULTS:

189 instruments were opened, and 32 instruments were used on average in each rhinoplasty. 55 instruments were used in at least 20% of cases. The 55 "high usage" instruments were used to create new, reduced rhinoplasty tray inventory lists. Based on our analysis, a new rhinoplasty tray inventory was created comprised of 68 instruments, a 64% reduction from 189.

CONCLUSION:

Instruments are sterilized and packed in gross excess for rhinoplasty procedures. Previously published figures estimate re-sterilization costs of $0.51 to $0.77 per instrument. Reduction in instruments opened from 189 to 68 is expected to lead to cost savings ranging from $62 to $93 per case, yielding a savings between $6200 and $9300 per 100 cases performed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II-3.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Rhinoplasty / Surgical Instruments / Utilization Review Type of study: Observational_studies Language: En Year: 2021 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Rhinoplasty / Surgical Instruments / Utilization Review Type of study: Observational_studies Language: En Year: 2021 Type: Article