Comparison of Reading Times of RFID-Tagged and Barcode-Engraved Surgical Instruments

Area of Science:

• Healthcare Management
• Medical Device Technology
• Patient Safety

Background:

• Individual management of surgical instruments is crucial for patient safety and reducing healthcare burdens.
• Current methods include radio-frequency identification (RFID) and barcoding.
• Efficiency, specifically reading times, has not been thoroughly compared between these methods.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the reading times of RFID-tagged versus barcode-engraved surgical instruments.
• To evaluate the impact of operator proficiency on the efficiency of these tracking methods.

Main Methods:

• Eight individuals and 41 surgical instruments from a varicose vein set were used.
• RFID tags and barcodes were applied to instruments.
• Five trials were conducted for each instrument, measuring reading times.

Main Results:

• RFID instruments had reading times of 64.0s (skilled) and 79.4s (unskilled).
• Barcode instruments had reading times of 190.4s (skilled) and 212.3s (unskilled).
• Barcodes took 2.7-3.0 times longer to read; RFID reduced labor costs significantly.

Conclusions:

• RFID-tagged surgical instruments offer a reduced workload and financial burden compared to barcodes.
• RFID technology can enhance patient safety by decreasing dependency on operator proficiency.