The single-use rhinolaryngoscope: an evaluation and cost comparison

Abstract

Background This study investigated whether the single-use rhinolaryngoscope is clinically and economically comparable to the conventional reusable rhinolaryngoscope within a tertiary otolaryngology centre in the UK. Methods A non-blinded, prospective and single-arm evaluation was carried out over a 5-day period, in which micro-costing was used to compare single-use rhinolaryngoscopes with reusable rhinolaryngoscopes. Results Overall, 68 per cent of the investigators perceived the single-use rhinolaryngoscope to be ‘good’ or ‘very good’, while 85 per cent believed the single-use rhinolaryngoscope could replace the reusable rhinolaryngoscope (n = 59). The incremental costs of reusable rhinolaryngoscope eyepieces and videoscopes in the out-patient clinic, when compared to single-use rhinolaryngoscopes, were £30 and £11, respectively. The incremental costs of reusable rhinolaryngoscope eyepieces and videoscopes in the acute surgical assessment unit, when compared to single-use rhinolaryngoscopes, were −£4 and −£73, respectively. Conclusion The single-use rhinolaryngoscope provides a clinically comparable, and potentially cost-minimising, alternative to the reusable rhinolaryngoscope for use in the acute surgical assessment unit of our hospital.

Laryngoscopy for thyroidectomy patients using a portable single use flexible laryngoscope (Ambu® aScope™ 4 RhinoLaryngo Slim): adaptation during covid-19 pandemic

“…The cost comparison study [2] based their conclusions of cost effectiveness on the price of £105 (GBP) per single use flexible laryngoscope versus an eyepiece and video laryngoscope setup in various clinical environments. Their cost estimates per use of reusable laryngoscopes ranged from £75 per use (for an eyepiece scope in the outpatient clinic) to £178 per use (for a video laryngoscope in an acute surgical assessment unit).…”

“…The authors feel that this information is likely to be transferable to their own institution as this is also a UK NHS hospital with similar setup. Furthermore, authors believe that the Ambu® aScope™ 4 RhinoLaryngo Slim will be priced at £105 for Scottish NHS boards, matching the comparison study [2] at St. George's Hospital, London. The cost comparison study did not comment on using the same disposable scope twice for the same patient, but the authors feel it would be safe to assume that this would only enhance any potential cost saving, particularly due to the reduced need for patients to reattend an outpatient clinic for this procedure.…”

“…The British Thyroid Association (BTA) recommends functional vocal cords assessment via laryngoscopy before and after thyroid surgery [1]. In most institutions, this is performed in an Otolaryngology outpatient clinic using either a reusable flexible video laryngoscope or a reusable eyepiece flexible laryngoscope with a stack setup [2]. This setup often means patients undergoing thyroid surgery have to attend additional clinic appointments or wait for the procedure to be performed in a ward clinic in the postoperative period.…”

“…The Ambu® aScope™ 4 RhinoLaryngo Slim is a disposable laryngoscope designed for flexible laryngoscopy that has recently been economically assessed in comparison to a standard setup in the UK and found to be comparable and perhaps even favourable both in practicality and cost when maintenance, cleaning and clinic setup is taken into account [2]. This scope comes with a reusable, wipeable portable HD monitor that allows image and video capture and media transfer to other devices.…”

Changes to otolaryngological practice in the coronavirus disease 2019 era

“…A non-blinded, prospective, and single-arm qualitative and micro-costing evaluation by Mistry et al ., in this month's issue, compared single-use endoscopes with reusable endoscopes in a tertiary otolaryngology centre in the UK over a 5-day period. 3 Overall, 68 per cent of investigators perceived the single-use scope to be ‘good’ or ‘very good’, while 85 per cent believed the single-use scope could replace the reusable scope. The authors conclude that the single-use endoscope provides a clinically comparable, and potentially cost-minimising, alternative.…”