Single-Use and Reusable Instruments in Podiatry - Essay Example

Nowadays, it’s very fortunate that podiatrists have developed ways to perform less invasive surgeries and smaller incisions in terms of operations. Related to this area of podiatric surgery and other practices is the equally important issue of what instruments to use. The discussion over the use of disposable or single-use instruments versus that of reusable or multiple-use instruments runs across the various areas of the medical and healthcare profession. On the one hand, some professionals claim that the use of disposable or single-use instruments ensures disinfection, even though most of the time the use of such instruments is quite more expensive. On the other hand, it is argued that the process of sterilization makes up for the disinfection of reusable or multiple-use instruments.  Also, it has proven itself to be more affordable for hospitals and clinics and thus more affordable for the patients too.

1. Aims of the Study

The researcher’s main aim in this study on the Comparative Analysis of Single-Use and Reusable Instruments in Podiatry is to emphasize the need for podiatrists in the professional healthcare community to seriously assess the efficiency and impact of both disposable/ single-use instruments and reusable/ multiple-use instruments. Standing by the profession’s oath to always put the concerns and safety of the patients with the highest regard, this study would hopefully bring about further discussions on improving instrumentation in the field of Podiatry- in terms of its costs, efficiency, applicability, and consequences to the well-being of the patients.

III. Objectives of the Study

According to the aims of this study, the specific objectives are the following:

1. Investigate the cost-effectiveness and efficiency for disinfection of disposable/ single-use instruments and reusable/ multiple-use instruments through analysis of records from a clinic, private hospital, and public hospital, and
2. Determine the feasibility of promoting disposable/ single-use instruments over reusable/ multiple-use instruments in the practice of podiatry in the UK

III. Methodology

A comprehensive document research and literature review will be used in this research. The main data-gathering method will include the analysis of data and information from participating clinics and hospitals, as well as the up-to-date search regarding the costs of purchasing and maintenance of both disposable/ single-use instruments and reusable/ multiple-use instruments, particularly in the practice of podiatry. The study will include the participation of a clinic, a private hospital, and a public hospital. Records regarding the costs of both disposable and reusable instruments will be obtained from these clinics and hospitals. From each clinic or hospital, 100 cases of podiatric operations that were performed through reusable instrumentation will be studied. The initial purchasing costs of these reusable surgical instruments as well as their depreciation costs, and all associated expenses like repairs, maintenance, replacements, cleaning, sterilization, and corresponding wages for those maintaining it will all be covered. Based on the type of reusable instruments that were used in the operations, a set of corresponding disposable instruments will be compared. Then, the initial purchasing costs of the disposable instruments as well as the costs of storing and disposing of them for all the three hundred individual cases will be calculated and compared with the total cost that single-use instruments would have caused for the same operations.

1. Review of Literature

          The following are studies related to the comparison of reusable and single-use instruments in the different fields of medicine. These studies may be consulted as they provide the available literature regarding the topic.

Adler S, Scherrer M, Ruckauer KD, Daschner FD 2005, ‘Comparison of economic and environmental impacts between disposable and reusable instruments used for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy’, Journal Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 19, pp. 268-272, (online INIST-CNRS)

Apelgren KN, Blank ML, Slomski CA, Hadjis NS (n.d.), ‘Reusable instruments are more cost-effective than disposable instruments for laparoscopic cholecystectomy’, (online http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

Colak T, Ersoz G, Akca T, Kanik A, Aydin S 2004, ‘Efficacy and safety of reuse of disposable laparoscopic instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized study, Journal Surgical Endoscopy. Vol. 18 (5), pp. 727-731, (online http://www.springerlink.com)

Demoulin L, Kesteloot K, Pennick F 1996, ‘A Cost comparison of disposable versus reusable instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy’, Journal Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 10 (5), pp. 520-525, (online http://www.springerlink.com)

Eddie G, White S. (n.d.), ‘A comparison of reusable versus disposable laparoscopic instrument costs’, (online http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

Marfin AG, Pandit JJ, Hames KC, Popat MT, Yentis SM (n.d.), ‘Comparison of single-use bougie with multiple-use bougie’, (online http://pt.wkhealth.com)

Muscarella, Lawrence F. Ph.D. 2001, ‘Biopsy Forceps: Disposable or Reusable?’, Gastroenterology Nursing. 24(2):64-68, (online http://www.gastroenterologynursing.com)

Rizzo J, Bernstein D, Gress F. (n.d.), ‘A performance, safety and cost comparison of reusable and disposable endoscopic biopsy forceps: a prospective, randomized trial’, (online http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)

Schaer, Gabriel N. MD; Koechlin, Ossi R. MD; Haller, Urs MD 1995, ‘Single-use versus reusable laparoscopic surgical instruments: A comparative cost analysis, American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 173(6):1812-1815, (online http://pt.wkhealth.com).

Tomkinson A, Phillips P, Scott JB, Harrison W, De Martin S, Backhouse SS, Temple M 2005, ‘A laboratory and clinical evaluation of single-use instruments for tonsil and adenoid surgery,  Clinical Otolaryngology & Allied Sciences. Vol. 30 (2), pp. 135-142, (online http://www.ingentaconnect.com)