Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 24, 2026
Swabbing the Urban Environment - A Pipeline for Sampling and Detection of SARS-CoV-2 From Environmental Reservoirs
Published on: April 9, 2021
The cost of being clean: A cost analysis of nasopharyngoscope reprocessing techniques
Leigh J Sowerby1, Luke Rudmik2
1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario.
Objective:
Nasopharyngoscopes are an essential instrument to otolaryngologists; reprocessing them in a high-value manner is paramount. Although several different techniques for reprocessing exist, all methods yield similar effectiveness. Given equivalent effectiveness outcomes, a cost analysis of four nasopharyngoscope reprocessing techniques was performed.
Study Design:
Cost-minimization analysis.
Methods:
Four techniques were evaluated: 1) an automated reprocessor using peracetic acid (Steris System 1; Steris Canada Inc., Mississauga, Canada), 2) an automated reprocessor using ortho-phthalaldehyde (OPA) (Cidex OPA; Advanced Sterilization Products, Johnson and Johnson Inc., Markham, Canada), 3) a manually performed accelerated hydrogen peroxide bath (Revital-Ox; Steris Canada Inc.), and 4) a chlorine dioxide wipe (Tristel Trio Wipes System; Tristel plc, Cambridgeshire, U.K.). The costing perspective was a third-party payer that was adjusted to 2014 Canadian dollars. The base-case scenario used an annual volume of 4,153 reprocessing events in a tertiary care setting, and a scenario analysis assessed the impact of volume and capital expense.
Results:
The cost per reprocessing event for the Steris (Steris Canada Inc.) automated endoscope reprocessing, Cidex OPA (Advanced Sterilization Products), Revital-Ox (Steris Canada Inc.), and Tristel Trio Wipes (Tristel plc) were $20.58, $14.20, $9.57, and $13.14, respectively. Scenario analysis demonstrated the Tristel Trio Wipes System (Tristel plc) was the least expensive method in practices with low reprocessing volumes (a threshold of less than 6 events per day, or 22 per week), whereas the Revital-Ox (Steris Canada Inc.) system was least expensive at higher volumes and became substantially more so as volumes increased.
Conclusion:
A manual accelerated hydrogen peroxide bath offers the least costly approach to nasopharyngoscope reprocessing. The convenience and portability of the Tristel Trio (Tristel plc) system may be a good alternative for low reprocessing volumes, or when rapid turnaround is necessary.
Level Of Evidence:
NA. Laryngoscope, 128:64-71, 2018.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
01:29Suctioning the Nasopharyngeal Airway
Equipment Required
01:30Methods of Sterilization II: Chemical Methods
Using chemical sterilization rather than heat to clean out equipment is recommended. It eradicates and removes all bacteria,...
01:30Cleaning, Sterilization, and Disinfection
Cleaning
The cleaning process usually involves using water with detergents or enzymatic cleaner and removing foreign material from objects and surfaces, including organic material such as body fluids or inorganic material like soil. Cleaning is performed before high-level disinfection and sterilization because foreign materials on the cover of the devices interfere with process...