科研速览 · Science Skim继续刷下去 · Keep skimming →
◆ Foot and ankle surgery : official journal of the European Society of Foot and Ankle Surgeons2026-08-18

Comparison of efficiency and cost of anterior ankle arthroscopy performed with needle versus standard arthroscope.

Andrew P Burnikel, J Brett Goodloe, Caroline Hoch, Joseph Cutrone, Christopher E Gross, Daniel J Scott

一句话结论 · In one sentence

Needle arthroscopy was more time efficient with no significant cost difference, offering surgeons a useful option to increase the efficiency of ankle arthroscopy and OR turnover.

原始摘要(英文原文)· Original abstract
BACKGROUND: This study uses time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) to compare the cost and efficiency of a 2.0 disposable needle arthroscope to a reusable 2.7-mm arthroscope in anterior ankle arthroscopy. METHODS: This prospective, hand-timed cohort study of 60 anterior ankle arthroscopy procedures (needle=41, traditional=19) with retrospective cost review calculated procedure and OR turnover costs at a single institution from 2021 to 2023. RESULTS: Needle arthroscopy demonstrated significantly shorter OR turnover time (28.53 vs 35.65 min, p = .021), incision to joint space time (1.06 vs 2.14 min, p = .007), and total arthroscopic time (12.58 vs 16.87 min, p = .023). Total costs were not significantly different ($1891.91 vs $1957.74, p = .546). Excluding OR turnover costs, traditional arthroscopy was less costly ($669.23 vs $850.78, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Needle arthroscopy was more time efficient with no significant cost difference, offering surgeons a useful option to increase the efficiency of ankle arthroscopy and OR turnover.
读原文 · Read the paper ↗

AI 追问PRO

登录后使用 AI 追问

讨论区

登录后参与讨论

相关论文 · Related

Comparison of efficiency and cost of anterior ankle arthroscopy performed with needle versus standard arthroscope. — 科研速览 Science Skim