Su1613 Reuse of Medical Devices Labeled for Single Use: Accepting and Overcoming a Need As a Cost-Saving Measure in an ERCP Unit

2015 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. AB351
Author(s):  
David H. Zagalsky ◽  
José M. Mella ◽  
Guidi Martin ◽  
Cecilia Curvale ◽  
Hwang Hui Jer ◽  
...  
1986 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
pp. 491-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Glen Mayhall

AbstractRising health care costs have prompted hospitals to turn to reprocessing and reuse of disposable devices as a cost-saving measure. The safety, efficacy, and cost benefit of such a practice are largely unknown. Classification schemata are presented as a means of categorizing the reasons for reprocessing and the types of adverse effects that may result from reprocessing and reuse. The very limited literature on reuse of disposable devices is reviewed. Examples of the categories of reprocessing and adverse effects are provided from a review of the experience with reprocessing and reuse at a university medical center. With the rising pressure for containment of health care costs, it is likely that this practice will expand further. The practice of reprocessing and reuse should be subjected to scientific study.


2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 280-290
Author(s):  
Janet Heinrich ◽  
Elizabeth A. Bradley ◽  
Marcia Crosse ◽  
Martin T. Gahart ◽  
Janina R Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (04) ◽  
pp. 430-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Hailey ◽  
Philip D. Jacobs ◽  
Nola M. Ries ◽  
Julie Polisena

Objectives:The aim of this study was to assess the evidence that reuse of medical devices marketed for single use only (SUDs) is safe, effective and cost-effective, and to consider the use and health services impact of this practice in Canada.Methods:A systematic review was performed of studies that reported clinical or economic outcomes following reuse of SUDs in humans. Direct costs of adverse health events associated with SUD reuse and indications of budget impact were obtained using data for devices for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and coronary angioplasty. Legal and ethical issues were reviewed, drawing on material relevant to Canada. Data on current reuse of SUDs were obtained through a survey of Canadian acute care hospitals.Results:Studies of variable quality suggested that SUD reuse could be safe and effective, and would give cost savings, if there were no adverse events. Eliminating reuse of SUDs for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and coronary angioplasty would add less than 0.1 percent to costs of the procedures over 1 year. Adverse health events associated with device reuse create liability risks; patients should be informed of any known or foreseeable risks of reuse. Most of the 28 percent (111/398) of acute hospitals that reprocess SUDs do so in-house. Some do not have a written policy or an incident reporting mechanism.Conclusions:There is insufficient evidence to establish the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of reusing SUDs. Legal and ethical issues require attention to minimize liability and maintain patient safety and trust. Some hospitals that reprocess SUDs do not have adequate documentation. These findings do not support the reuse of SUDs in Canadian hospitals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document