Objective As health care expenditures rise, novel ways to increase efficiency are sought. The operating room (OR) represents an area where there is opportunity to optimize work flow and supply use. Evidence suggests that instrument redundancy in the OR tends to be high and that direct cost savings can be achieved by “optimizing” surgical trays. The purpose of this study was to quantify the potential time savings associated with surgical tray optimization. Methods Instrument utilization was reviewed for 4 procedures: tonsillectomy, sinus surgery, septoplasty, and septorhinoplasty. Instruments used in <20% of cases were excluded. Data on tray assembly time in the central processing department and instrument setup time in the OR were prospectively collected over a 3-month period before and after tray optimization. Student’s t test (α = 0.05) was used to determine whether times were significantly different following optimization. Results Tray assembly times were found to be significantly shorter following optimization, with percentage reduction in time ranging from 58% to 66% ( P < .05). In the OR, percentage reduction in setup time ranged from 26% to 37% ( P < .05). Variability in assembly and setup times was also found to be narrower postoptimization. Discussion Tray optimization may reduce stress and adverse events and allow managers to better estimate staffing requirements. Cost-benefits could not be determined given a limited understanding of how departments choose to redistribute time savings. Implications for Practice Measurable and significant time savings can be achieved by assessing instrument utilization rates and reducing tray redundancy, leading to lower performance variability and improved efficiency.

No abstract

Purpose While targeted temperature management (TTM) has been recommended in patients with shockable cardiac arrest (CA) and suggested in patients with non-shockable rhythms, few data exist regarding the impact of the rewarming rate on systemic inflammation. We compared serum levels of the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 (IL6) measured with two rewarming rates after TTM at 33 °C in patients with shockable out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Methods ISOCRATE was a single-center randomized controlled trial comparing rewarming at 0.50 °C/h versus 0.25 °C/h in patients coma after shockable OHCA in 2016–2020. The primary outcome was serum IL6 level 24–48 h after reaching 33 °C. Secondary outcomes included the day-90 Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) and the 48-h serum neurofilament light-chain (NF-L) level. Results We randomized 50 patients. The median IL6 area-under-the-curve was similar between the two groups (12,389 [7256–37,200] vs. 8859 [6825–18,088] pg/mL h; P = 0.55). No significant difference was noted in proportions of patients with favorable day-90 CPC scores (13/25 patients at 0.25 °C/h (52.0%; 95% CI 31.3–72.2%) and 13/25 patients at 0.50 °C/h (52.0%; 95% CI 31.3–72.2%; P = 0.99)). Median NF-L levels were not significantly different between the 0.25 °C/h and 0.50 °C/h groups (76.0 pg mL, [25.5–3074.0] vs. 192 pg mL, [33.6–4199.0]; P = 0.43; respectively). Conclusion In our RCT, rewarming from 33 °C at 0.25 °C/h, compared to 0.50 °C/h, did not decrease the serum IL6 level after shockable CA. Further RCTs are needed to better define the optimal TTM strategy for patients with CA. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02555254. Registered September 14, 2015. Take-Home Message: Rewarming at a rate of 0.25 °C/h, compared to 0.50 °C, did not result in lower serum IL6 levels after achievement of hypothermia at 33 °C in patients who remained comatose after shockable cardiac arrest. No associations were found between the slower rewarming rate and day-90 functional outcomes or mortality. 140-character Tweet: Rewarming at 0.25 °C versus 0.50 °C did not decrease serum IL6 levels after hypothermia at 33 °C in patients comatose after shockable cardiac arrest.