A Cost and Waste-Savings Comparison Between Single-Use and Reusable Pulse Oximetry Sensors Across US Operating Rooms
Authors' conclusion
Using reusable clips versus single-use stickers across all ORs nationally would result in appreciable annual cost savings and waste generation reduction impact.
Study context
- Population
- All US operating rooms nationally
- Comparison
- Reusable pulse oximetry sensor clips vs single-use sensor stickers
- Outcome
- National net annual cost savings of transitioning from single-use stickers to reusable clips
- Follow-up
- Annual
Methodological detailscost and waste comparison, scenario analysis (conservative and favorable states), No patient data or human subjects research; no IRB approval required
- Cost and waste comparison
- Scenario analysis (conservative and favorable states)
- No patient data or human subjects research; no IRB approval required
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
National net annual savings, transition to reusable clips in all ORs
Net annual savings, conservative state
$510.5 million
Net annual savings, favorable state
$519.3 million
Further findings
Annual waste diverted from landfill
- Conservative state
- 587 tons
- Favorable state
- 589 tons
- Without any recycling interventions
Workload burden of cleaning reusable clips
- Additional expense
- $618k
- Cost savings
- $309k
Cost of capital (interest on freed-up capital)
- Low-interest rates of 2.85%
- $541k
- High-interest rates of 7.08%
- $1.3 million
Original publication
A Cost and Waste-Savings Comparison Between Single-Use and Reusable Pulse Oximetry Sensors Across US Operating Rooms. Anesth Analg. Published 9 January 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →