Can procedure time for paracentesis be optimized based on bottle selection?
Health care policy
Optimization
Paracentesis
Value-based care
Journal
Abdominal radiology (New York)
ISSN: 2366-0058
Titre abrégé: Abdom Radiol (NY)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101674571
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2021
08 2021
Historique:
received:
19
01
2021
accepted:
27
02
2021
revised:
23
02
2021
pubmed:
31
3
2021
medline:
3
8
2021
entrez:
30
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The purpose of our study was to assess if plastic containers could decrease the overall procedure time for paracentesis relative to more commonly used glass containers. In this IRB exempt study, initial pilot data comparing filling time of glass and plastic containers in an ex vivo setting under identical conditions revealed power calculations that n = 37 patients per group would be needed to achieve standard deviation (SD) = 60 s, difference (diff) = 40 s, two-tailed alpha-level 0.05, and power 80%. Total of 43 patients (93 containers) were enrolled and randomized to glass or plastic bottles at enrollment. Timing of bottle filling was assessed using standardized sonographic screen captures. An interim look at statistics at n = 20 patients indicated that original conjectures from pilot data were conservative and smaller sample size was sufficient to stop the study and conduct the analyses. Specifically, SD = 54 s, diff = 49 s, two-tailed alpha-level 0.05, and power 80% required n = 21 patients per group. Plastic containers had a statistically significantly lower average filling time per bottle (162.7 ± 53.3 s) compared to glass (212.2 ± 50.4 s) (p = 0.003). Viscosity was calculated for each specimen and did not affect the statistical significance of the results (p = 0.32). Plastic containers have 50 s time savings of per bottle filling time as compared to glass bottles as theorized based on their faster flow rate. This holds true in both an ex vivo setting and in patients and can have important downstream impacts on patient throughput, provider efficiency and system wide cost savings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33783568
doi: 10.1007/s00261-021-03033-8
pii: 10.1007/s00261-021-03033-8
doi:
Substances chimiques
Plastics
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4062-4067Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Thomsen TW, Shaffer RW, White B, Setnik GS (2006) Videos in clinical medicine. Paracentesis. N Engl J Med 355 (19):e21. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMvcm062234
doi: 10.1056/NEJMvcm062234
pubmed: 17093242
Neong SF, Adebayo D, Wong F (2019) An update on the pathogenesis and clinical management of cirrhosis with refractory ascites. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 13 (4):293-305. https://doi.org/10.1080/17474124.2018.1555469
doi: 10.1080/17474124.2018.1555469
pubmed: 30791777
Sanyal AJ, Bajaj JS, Shaw J (2010) Paracentesis. In: Ascites, Hyponatremia and Hepatorenal Syndrome: Progress in Treatment. In: Gerbes AL (ed) Front Gastrointest Res, vol 28. Karger, Basel, pp 23-31
Duszak R, Jr., Chatterjee AR, Schneider DA (2010) National fluid shifts: fifteen-year trends in paracentesis and thoracentesis procedures. J Am Coll Radiol 7 (11):859-864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2010.04.013
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.04.013
pubmed: 21040867
Frosch R, Gallopoulos N (1989) Strategies for Manufacturing. Scientific American 261 (3):144-153
doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0989-144