Cargando…
Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of disposable tonometer versus non-disposable tonometer use in the UK and to determine methods of decontamination and frequency of replacement of prisms. A total of 137 ophthalmology departments were interviewed by telephone using a structured questionnaire. The...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Open Ophthalmology
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5721635/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29354698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2016-000019 |
_version_ | 1783284849126146048 |
---|---|
author | Jasani, Kirti M Putri, Christine Pearl, Amy Sattar, Nayeem Mercieca, Karl Spaeth, George Bhan-Bhargava, Archana |
author_facet | Jasani, Kirti M Putri, Christine Pearl, Amy Sattar, Nayeem Mercieca, Karl Spaeth, George Bhan-Bhargava, Archana |
author_sort | Jasani, Kirti M |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of disposable tonometer versus non-disposable tonometer use in the UK and to determine methods of decontamination and frequency of replacement of prisms. A total of 137 ophthalmology departments were interviewed by telephone using a structured questionnaire. The main outcome measured were: types of tonometer prisms used in clinic (disposable, non-disposable and/or other); average disposable prisms used per clinic session; average lifespan of non-disposable prisms; prism preference by glaucoma and other teams within department. A cost and benefit analysis was then performed on the data acquired. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-five departments were identified for the survey. Of these, 137 (88.3%) responded. Eighty-one departments (59.1%) used Tonosafe prisms alone, whereas 22 departments (16.1%) used Goldmann non-disposable prisms exclusively. Thirty-five departments (64%) on average have a change rate of 26.5% per year (range: 0–100, median: 20) attributed to damage, loss or theft. Sixteen departments (29%) reported that prisms were used until damaged or lost. Four departments (7%) were uncertain of their prism usage and could not provide further information. CONCLUSIONS: Majority of eye departments in the UK opt for disposable prisms. This survey shows the perceived cost-effectiveness of disposable prisms is overestimated when the true cost of disinfection and damage is taken into account. Significant cost savings coupled with the low risk of infectivity (if decontaminated properly) should prompt clinicians and ophthalmic departments worldwide to reconsider the use of non-disposable prisms. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5721635 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Open Ophthalmology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57216352018-01-19 Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey Jasani, Kirti M Putri, Christine Pearl, Amy Sattar, Nayeem Mercieca, Karl Spaeth, George Bhan-Bhargava, Archana BMJ Open Ophthalmol Original Article PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of disposable tonometer versus non-disposable tonometer use in the UK and to determine methods of decontamination and frequency of replacement of prisms. A total of 137 ophthalmology departments were interviewed by telephone using a structured questionnaire. The main outcome measured were: types of tonometer prisms used in clinic (disposable, non-disposable and/or other); average disposable prisms used per clinic session; average lifespan of non-disposable prisms; prism preference by glaucoma and other teams within department. A cost and benefit analysis was then performed on the data acquired. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-five departments were identified for the survey. Of these, 137 (88.3%) responded. Eighty-one departments (59.1%) used Tonosafe prisms alone, whereas 22 departments (16.1%) used Goldmann non-disposable prisms exclusively. Thirty-five departments (64%) on average have a change rate of 26.5% per year (range: 0–100, median: 20) attributed to damage, loss or theft. Sixteen departments (29%) reported that prisms were used until damaged or lost. Four departments (7%) were uncertain of their prism usage and could not provide further information. CONCLUSIONS: Majority of eye departments in the UK opt for disposable prisms. This survey shows the perceived cost-effectiveness of disposable prisms is overestimated when the true cost of disinfection and damage is taken into account. Significant cost savings coupled with the low risk of infectivity (if decontaminated properly) should prompt clinicians and ophthalmic departments worldwide to reconsider the use of non-disposable prisms. BMJ Open Ophthalmology 2017-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5721635/ /pubmed/29354698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2016-000019 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Original Article Jasani, Kirti M Putri, Christine Pearl, Amy Sattar, Nayeem Mercieca, Karl Spaeth, George Bhan-Bhargava, Archana Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey |
title | Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey |
title_full | Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey |
title_fullStr | Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey |
title_full_unstemmed | Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey |
title_short | Disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a UK national survey |
title_sort | disposable versus non-disposable tonometer prisms: a uk national survey |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5721635/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29354698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2016-000019 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jasanikirtim disposableversusnondisposabletonometerprismsauknationalsurvey AT putrichristine disposableversusnondisposabletonometerprismsauknationalsurvey AT pearlamy disposableversusnondisposabletonometerprismsauknationalsurvey AT sattarnayeem disposableversusnondisposabletonometerprismsauknationalsurvey AT merciecakarl disposableversusnondisposabletonometerprismsauknationalsurvey AT spaethgeorge disposableversusnondisposabletonometerprismsauknationalsurvey AT bhanbhargavaarchana disposableversusnondisposabletonometerprismsauknationalsurvey |