TY - JOUR
T1 - Time Efficiency and Performance of Single-Use vs Reusable Cystoscopes
T2 - A Randomized Benchtop and Simulated Clinical Assessment
AU - Chen, Ricky
AU - Baas, Catalina
AU - Farkouh, Ala’a
AU - Shete, Kanha
AU - Peverini, Daniel R.
AU - Hartman, John C.
AU - Amasyali, Akin S.
AU - Belle, Joshua
AU - Baldwin, Elizabeth A.
AU - Baldwin, D. Duane
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
PY - 2024/1/1
Y1 - 2024/1/1
N2 - Introduction: A flexible cystoscope is an indispensable tool for urologists, facilitating a variety of procedures in both the operating room and at bedside. Single-use cystoscopes offer benefits including accessibility and decreased burden for reprocessing. The aims of this study were to compare time efficiency and performance of single-use and reusable cystoscopes. Methods: Ten new Ambu® aScopeTM 4 Cysto single-use and two Olympus CYF-5 reusable cystoscopes were compared in simulated bedside cystoscopy and benchtop testing. Ten urologists performed simulated cystoscopy using both cystoscopes in a randomized order. Times for supply-gathering, setup, cystoscopy, cleanup, and cumulative time were recorded, followed by a Likert feedback survey. For benchtop assessment, physical, optical, and functional specifications were assessed and compared between cystoscopes. Results: The single-use cystoscope demonstrated shorter supply-gathering, setup, cleanup, and cumulative times (824 vs 1231 seconds; p < 0.05) but a comparable cystoscopy time to the reusable cystoscope (202 vs 212 seconds; p = 0.32). The single-use cystoscope had a higher image resolution, but a narrower field of view. Upward deflection was greater for the single-use cystoscope (214.50◦ vs 199.45◦; p < 0.01) but required greater force (2.5 ·). The working channel diameter and irrigation rate were greater in the reusable cystoscope. While the single-use cystoscope lacked tumor enhancing optical features, it had higher Likert scale scores for Time Efficiency and Overall Satisfaction. Conclusion: The single-use cystoscope demonstrates comparable benchtop performance and superior time efficiency compared to reusable cystoscopes. However, the reusable cystoscope has superior optical versatility and flow rate. Knowledge of these differences allows for optimal cystoscope selection based on procedure indication.
AB - Introduction: A flexible cystoscope is an indispensable tool for urologists, facilitating a variety of procedures in both the operating room and at bedside. Single-use cystoscopes offer benefits including accessibility and decreased burden for reprocessing. The aims of this study were to compare time efficiency and performance of single-use and reusable cystoscopes. Methods: Ten new Ambu® aScopeTM 4 Cysto single-use and two Olympus CYF-5 reusable cystoscopes were compared in simulated bedside cystoscopy and benchtop testing. Ten urologists performed simulated cystoscopy using both cystoscopes in a randomized order. Times for supply-gathering, setup, cystoscopy, cleanup, and cumulative time were recorded, followed by a Likert feedback survey. For benchtop assessment, physical, optical, and functional specifications were assessed and compared between cystoscopes. Results: The single-use cystoscope demonstrated shorter supply-gathering, setup, cleanup, and cumulative times (824 vs 1231 seconds; p < 0.05) but a comparable cystoscopy time to the reusable cystoscope (202 vs 212 seconds; p = 0.32). The single-use cystoscope had a higher image resolution, but a narrower field of view. Upward deflection was greater for the single-use cystoscope (214.50◦ vs 199.45◦; p < 0.01) but required greater force (2.5 ·). The working channel diameter and irrigation rate were greater in the reusable cystoscope. While the single-use cystoscope lacked tumor enhancing optical features, it had higher Likert scale scores for Time Efficiency and Overall Satisfaction. Conclusion: The single-use cystoscope demonstrates comparable benchtop performance and superior time efficiency compared to reusable cystoscopes. However, the reusable cystoscope has superior optical versatility and flow rate. Knowledge of these differences allows for optimal cystoscope selection based on procedure indication.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85182731750&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85182731750&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1089/end.2023.0372
DO - 10.1089/end.2023.0372
M3 - Article
C2 - 37800857
AN - SCOPUS:85182731750
SN - 0892-7790
VL - 38
SP - 53
EP - 59
JO - Journal of Endourology
JF - Journal of Endourology
IS - 1
ER -