Cost of healthcare products processing: an integrative review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5327/Z1414-4425202000020007Keywords:
Custos hospitalares/Hospital costs/Costos de hospital. Gestão em saúde/Health management/Gestión en salud. Economia da enfermagem/Economics, nursing/Economía de la enfermería. Esterilização/Sterilization/Esterilización.Abstract
Objective: To analyze the knowledge produced in the last decade on hospital costs related to the processing of reusable healthcare products (HP)
performed in Sterile Processing Departments (SPD) and processing companies. Method: Integrative literature review, with searches in the following databases:
Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Latin American and
Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Scopus, and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO). The selected articles were published between 2009 and
April 2019. The initial search resulted in 782 articles and, after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the final sample consisted of 15 studies, which were
analyzed in full. Results: Authors of most studies compared the cost of different technologies employed in the processing of HP to achieve savings, or evaluated
the reduction of waste-related expenditures, mainly with the reduction of the size of surgery trays to reduce the processing cost. Conclusion: The processing of
HP proved to be a measure that promotes economy when properly selecting the technologies involved in the process and avoiding waste.
References
Ministério da Saúde (BR), Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Resolução - RDC nº 15, de 15 de março de 2012. Dispõe sobre requisitos de boas práticas para o processamento de produtos para saúde e dá outras providências [Internet]. Brasília: ANVISA, 2012. [Acesso em: 2019 jun 16]. Diponível em: http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/anvisa/2012/rdc0015_15_03_2012 tml.
Souza WR, Spiri WC, Lima SAM, Bernades A, Luppi CHB. Utilização do Custeio Baseado em Atividades em Centro de Material e Esterilização como ferramenta gerencial. Rev. Eletr. Enf. [Internet]. 2015 abr/jun [acesso em: 2019 abr 14]; 17(2):290-301. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5216/ree.v17i2.27540.
Vital JS, Miranda LN, Nagliate PC, Vasconcelos EL. Analysis of Cost of Sterilization Packaging Using Costing Based Activities. J Nurs UFPE on line [Internet]. 2016 aug. [cited 2019 apr 14]; 10(8):2877-85. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5205/relou.9373-82134-1-RV1008201613.
Tome MF, Lima AFC. Mapeamento do Processo de Reprocessamento de Campos Cirúrgicos de Tecido de Algodão. Rev SOBECC 2015a out/dez; 20(4):197-201. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5327/Z1414-4425201500040003.
Tome MF; Lima AFC. Custo Direto de Reprocessamento de Campos Cirúrgicos de Tecido de Algodão: um estudo de custo. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2015b; 49(3):494-501. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0080-623420150000300018.
Pissinati PSC, Haddad MCL, Rossaneis MA, Gil RB, Belei RA. Costs of Reusable and Disposable Aprons in a Public Teaching Hospital. Rev Esc Enferm USP on line [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2019 aug 14]; 48(5):915-21. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0080-623420140000500019.
Souza MTS, Silva MD, Carvalho R. Revisão Integrativa: o que é e como fazer. Rev. Einstein. São Paulo. 2010; 8(1Pt1):103. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1679-45082010rw1134.
Whittemore R, Knafl K. The Integrative Review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005; 52(5): 546-553. Doi: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x_.
Ursi ES, Gavão CM. Prevenção de Lesões de Pele no Perioperatório: revisão integrativa da literatura. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2006 Jan/fev [acesso em: 2019 abr 03]; 14(1):124-31. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rlae/v14n1/v14n1a17.
Krohn M, Fengler J, Mickley T, Flessa S. Analysis of processes and costs of alternative packaging options of sterile goods in hospitals: a case study in two German hospitals. Health Econ Rev. 2019; 9:1. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s1361-018-0218-2.
Stipanich C, Goulardins JB, Medeiros M, Maria F, Tanaka C. Comparação de custos em diferentes processos de abastecimento de materiais de fisioterapia respiratória em um hospital público de porte extra. Rev. Pesq, Fisio. 2018 mai; 8(2):230-238. Doi: http://doi.org/10.17267/2238-2704rpf.v8i2.1927.
McCreanor V, Graves N. An economic analysis of the benefits of sterilizing medical instruments in low-temperature systems instead of steam. Am J Infect Control. 2017; 45:756-60. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2017.02.026.
Jerico MC, Castilho V. Gerenciamento de custos: aplicação do método de Custeio Baseado em Atividades em Centro de Material Esterilizado. Rev Esc Enferm USP on line [Internet]. 2010 [acesso em: 2019 abr 14]; 44(3):745-52. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/reeusp/v44n3/28.pdf
Nast K, Swords KA. Decreasing operating room costs via reduction of surgical instruments. J Pediatr Urol. 2019. Doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.01.013.
Cichos KH, Linsky PL, Wei B, Minnich DJ, Cerfolio RJ. Cost Savings of Standardization of Thoracic Surgical Instruments: The Processo of Lean. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017; 104:1889-95. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.06.064.
Isaacson D, Ahmad BA, Metzler I, Tzou DT, Taguchi K, Usawachintachit M et al. Defining the Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscope Reprocessing Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. J Endourol. 2017 out; 31(10):1026-31. Doi: http://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0463.
Van Meter MM, Adam RA. Costs associated with instrument sterilization in gynecologic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2016 nov; 215:652.e1-5. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.019.
Paula JRA, Silva RCR, Vedovato CA, Boaventura AP. Instrumentais nas caixas cirúrgicas: avaliação de custo. Rev SOBECC. 2015 abr/jun [acesso em: 2019 abr 14]; 20(2):73-80. Disponível em: http://files.bvs.br/upload/S/1414-4425/2015/v20n2/a5019.pdf.
Stockert EW, Langerman A. Assessing the Magnitude and Costs of Intraoperative Inefficiencies Attributable to Surgical Instrument Trays. J Am Coll Surg. 2014 out; 219(4):646-55. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.06.019.
Kuznik A, Lamorde M, Sekuga DB, Picho B, Coutinho A. Medical male circumcision for HIV/AIDS pevention in Uganda – the cost of disposable versus re-usable circumcision kits. Trop Doct. 2012 jan; 42:5-7. Doi http://doi.org/10.1258/td.2011.110297.
Yung E, Gagner M, Pomp A, Dakin G, Milone L, Strain G. Cost comparison of reusable and single-use ultrasonic shears for Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery. Obes surg. 2010; 20: 512-518. Doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-008-9723-4
Tome MF, Lima AFC. Custo do reprocessamento de campos cirúrgicos de tecido de algodão: um estudo de caso [Dissertação]. São Paulo: Escola de Enfermagem da Universidade de São Paulo; 2014. 120p. Disponível em: http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/7/7140/.../Mariana_Fexina_Tome_ME_Original.pdf.
Freitas LR, Tripple AFV, Felipe DP, Rodrigues NSR, Melo DS. Embalagem de tecido de algodão: análise do uso em hospitais de médio e grande porte. Rev Eletr Enfer [Internet]. 2012 out/dez [acesso em: 2019 mar 28]; 14(4):811-820. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5216/ree.v14i4.16612.
Souza AS, Sória DAC, Araújo JO, Silva MT, Andrade NC. Embalagem para Esterilização: suas aplicações e Recomendações na Prática Hospitalar. Rev Pesq: Cuid Fundam online [Internet]. 2010 out/dez; 2(Ed. Supl.):316-319. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.9789/2175-5361.2010.v0i0.%25p.
Sociedade Brasileira de Enfermeiros de Centro Cirúrgico, Recuperação Anestésica e Centro de Material e Esterilização. Práticas recomendadas SOBECC. 6 ed. São Paulo: Manole, 2013.
Sanjuana GOM, Iris CH, Federico MQJ. Análisis de costos em três métodos de esterilización. Rev Enferm IMMS. 2006 [acesso em: 2019 jun 28]; 14(3):131-135. Disponible: https://www.medigraphic.com/pdfs/enfermeriaimss/eim-2006/eim063c.pdf
Seavey R. High-level disinfection, sterilization, and antisepsis: Current issues in reprocessing medical and surgical instruments. Am J Infect Control. 2013; 41:S111-S117. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2012.09.030.
Evangelista SS, Santos SG, Stoianoff MAR, Oliveira AC. Analysis of microbial load on surgical instruments after clinical use and following manual and automated cleaning. Am J Infect Control. 2015; 43:522-7. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2014.12.018.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
By publishing in Revista SOBECC, authors retain the copyright of their article and agree to license their work using a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) International Public License, thus accepting the terms of this license. The CC BY 4.0 license allows others to distribute, remix, adapt, and create from the published article, even for commercial purposes, provided they give due credit to the creators of the work (authors of the article).
The authors grant to Revista SOBECC the right of first publication, to identify itself as the original publisher, and grant to the journal a non-exclusive license to use the work in the following ways: (1) to sell and/or distribute the article in hard copies and/or in electronic format; (2) to distribute parts and/or the entire article in order to promote the journal through the internet and other digital and printed media; (3) to record and reproduce the article in any format, including digital media.
With this license, authors can enter into separate contracts for non-exclusive distribution of the article (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgement of authorship and initial publication in Revista SOBECC. Authors are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online after publication in the Revista SOBECC, as this can increase the article's visibility and impact.
In line with the journal's policies, each published article will be assigned a CC BY 4.0 license, which will be visible on the abstract page and in the PDF of each article with the respective link to the license terms.
