Suscribirse

What is the cost burden of surgical implant waste? An analysis of surgical implant waste in an orthopedics and trauma surgery department of a French university hospital in 2016 - 19/09/19

Doi : 10.1016/j.otsr.2019.06.010 
Théa Laurut a, , Chloé Duran a, Arnaud Pages a, b, Marie-Claire Morin a, Etienne Cavaignac c
a Pharmacie, Hôpitaux de Toulouse, Hôpital Paule de Viguier, 330, avenue de Grande-Bretagne, 31059 Toulouse cedex 9, France 
b Inserm, UMR1027, Université Paul-Sabatier Toulouse III, 118, route de Narbonne, 31062 Toulouse cedex 9, France 
c Chirurgie orthopédique et traumatologique, Hôpitaux de Toulouse, Hôpital Pierre-Paul Riquet, place du Dr Baylac, 31059 Toulouse cedex 9, France 

Corresponding author.

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
Artículo gratuito.

Conéctese para beneficiarse!

Abstract

Background

During an orthopedic or trauma surgery procedure, when an implantable medical device is unpackaged, not implanted and cannot be resterilized, it is considered “waste”. The cost burden falls on the hospital. The French Social Security Code provides for add-on reimbursement for certain expensive or very specialized devices (supplementary list of costly implants). To allow its restocking without linking it to a patient or reimbursement request, the wasted implant is tracked in a computerized database. The economic impact of these wasted implants is not known in France. This led us to conduct a retrospective study: 1) to determine the percentage and number of wasted implants, 2) to identify elements related to the surgery that impact implant waste.

Hypothesis

Various elements of the surgical environment (type of procedure, specialty, surgeon experience, time of year) can independently contribute to the non-implantation of a medical device.

Methods

We carried out a retrospective observational study of data collected prospectively in the database of our teaching hospital in 2016. The primary outcome was the percentage of wasted implants. The secondary outcome was the mean cost of these wasted implants. These parameters were determined for all the implants used in orthopedics and trauma surgery and tracked in this department, then for each variable hypothesized to led to non-implantation. Our analysis was descriptive, then comparative.

Results

In our database, 29,073 devices were tracked (€3,761,180), of which 1995 devices were wasted (6.9%). The total cost of the wasted implants was €179,193 (4.8% of the overall cost). The breakdown of the wasted implants was 430 (4.4%) from the add-on list (average cost of €293.10) versus 1565 implants associated with the hospital's diagnosis-related group payment system (average cost of €33.90). Trauma surgery procedures had significantly more wasted implants than orthopedic surgery (1135 vs. 860 (p<0.01)), although the individual cost was less (€59.20 vs. €130.10 (p<0.01)). Fracture fixation implants were more likely to be wasted than ligament reconstruction or arthroplasty implants, with a lower mean cost. More implants were wasted during hip arthroplasty than during other arthroplasty procedures. Less experienced surgeons wasted more implants than more experienced surgeons (1087 vs. 905 (p<0.01)) but these implants cost less (€69.20 vs. €114.80 (p<0.05)). The percentage of implants wasted was higher during the resident changeover period relative to the other months of the year (772 vs. 1223 (p<0.01)).

Discussion

This study is the first attempt at quantifying the number and cost of wasted implants in the context of orthopedics and trauma surgery at a teaching hospital in France. While trauma surgery is associated with more wasted implants, the cost burden is higher in orthopedics. Surgeons, by virtue of their experience and teaching mandate, have a decisive role managing this cost burden.

Type of study

IV, Retrospective study.

El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Wasted implants, Orthopedics, Trauma surgery, Healthcare costs


Esquema


© 2019  Publicado por Elsevier Masson SAS.
Añadir a mi biblioteca Eliminar de mi biblioteca Imprimir
Exportación

    Exportación citas

  • Fichero

  • Contenido

Vol 105 - N° 6

P. 1205-1209 - octobre 2019 Regresar al número
Artículo precedente Artículo precedente
  • Evaluation of an oral analgesia protocol for upper-limb fracture reduction in the paediatric emergency department: Prospective study of 101 patients
  • Véronique Chasle, Tommaso de Giorgis, Marie-Aline Guitteny, Marie Desgranges, Zofia Metreau, Tiphaine Herve, Romain Longuet, Céline Farges, Amélie Ryckewaert, Philippe Violas
| Artículo siguiente Artículo siguiente
  • A technical note to prevent superficial tumor cell dissemination at fungating soft tissue tumor resection
  • Ewald Musser, Maria Smolle, Jörg Friesenbichler, Andreas Leithner, Marko Bergovec

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.

Mi cuenta


Declaración CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM se declara a la CNIL, la declaración N º 1286925.

En virtud de la Ley N º 78-17 del 6 de enero de 1978, relativa a las computadoras, archivos y libertades, usted tiene el derecho de oposición (art.26 de la ley), el acceso (art.34 a 38 Ley), y correcta (artículo 36 de la ley) los datos que le conciernen. Por lo tanto, usted puede pedir que se corrija, complementado, clarificado, actualizado o suprimido información sobre usted que son inexactos, incompletos, engañosos, obsoletos o cuya recogida o de conservación o uso está prohibido.
La información personal sobre los visitantes de nuestro sitio, incluyendo su identidad, son confidenciales.
El jefe del sitio en el honor se compromete a respetar la confidencialidad de los requisitos legales aplicables en Francia y no de revelar dicha información a terceros.


Todo el contenido en este sitio: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, sus licenciantes y colaboradores. Se reservan todos los derechos, incluidos los de minería de texto y datos, entrenamiento de IA y tecnologías similares. Para todo el contenido de acceso abierto, se aplican los términos de licencia de Creative Commons.