Category: Products

Endoscopies are common medical procedures that allow a doctor to look inside a person’s body and observe an internal organ in detail using an endoscope—a long, thin tube with a camera at one end. An estimated 75 million endoscopies are performed each year in the United States—and 68% (51.5 million) of those are gastrointestinal endoscopies. Other areas include the respiratory tract; ear; urinary tract; female reproductive tract; and through small incisions into an abdominal or pelvic cavity, interior of a joint, or organs of the chest.

In recent years, conversations about single-use and reusable endoscopes have increased within the healthcare industry—specifically about the use of single-use endoscopes. This escalating interest can be attributed to several key factors. First and foremost, patient safety has emerged as an important concern, urging physicians to scrutinize endoscopic procedures. The potential risks associated with inadequate sterilization of reusable endoscopes have spurred discussions about single-use alternatives. Moreover, rising healthcare costs have prompted healthcare organizations to assess the financial implications of adopting either option. The environmental impact of medical waste generated by single-use endoscopes has also fueled debate.

In this blog post, we’ll explore the advantages and disadvantages of single-use and reusable endoscopes, especially as it relates to patient safety, financial implications and environmental impact.

Prioritizing Patient Safety: The Soaring Adoption of Single-Use Endoscopes

Single-use endoscopes have gained significant popularity in recent years—specifically because of an increased focus on patient safety and research suggesting cross-contamination. Reusable endoscopes, despite undergoing meticulous cleaning and sterilization processes, can still harbor residual bacteria, viruses and other pathogens that pose a threat to subsequent patients. In fact, in October 2021, the American Journal of Gastroenterology issued an analysis of studies published from 2010 to 2020, concluding that nearly 20% of reprocessed patient-ready gastrointestinal endoscopes may be contaminated with microorganisms.

Even with strict protocols and cleaning requirements in place, it is nearly impossible to guarantee total elimination of all contaminants, especially because of the complex design of endoscopes with multiple crevices that are difficult to access during cleaning. By contrast, single-use endoscopes are sterile, providing a fresh and uncontaminated tool for each procedure. This significantly reduces the risk of infectious transmission between patients and helps maintain a safer healthcare environment. 

Reusable endoscopes are also subject to wear and tear over time, as well as damage from repeated sterilization processes, which can compromise their functionality and effectiveness. Inadequate cleaning or sterilization can lead to the buildup of debris, residual fluids or biofilms, increasing the risk of infection or inflammatory reactions when the endoscope is used on subsequent patients. Single-use endoscopes, on the other hand, are designed for one-time use and are manufactured to high standards of quality and sterility. This reduces the likelihood of technical malfunctions or suboptimal imaging quality that could potentially impact patient safety. 

Financial Considerations in the Reusable vs. Single-Use Endoscope Debate

When deciding between reusable and single-use endoscopes, hospitals and healthcare facilities must consider the costs associated with both options. Single-use endoscopes may have higher costs upfront, but healthcare supply chain executives must consider the long-term costs associated with reusable endoscopes when making the decision. 

The reprocessing of reusable endoscopes incurs extra costs. It requires investment in cleaning and sterilization equipment, as well as the use of chemicals and skilled personnel for proper reprocessing. These expenses can add up over time. Because reusable endoscopes are prone to wear and tear, they may require repairs or replacement of damaged components. These costs, along with the associated downtime during repairs, can be significant and impact the financial bottom line.

Evaluating Environmental Implications: Single-Use vs. Reusable Endoscopes

The choice between single-use endoscopes and reusable endoscopes not only involves patient safety conversations and financial considerations, but also raises important environmental impact concerns. Hospitals and healthcare organizations are increasingly concerned about sustainability and the environmental impact of their operations. The scale of their operations, coupled with the continuous need for patient care, results in substantial resource consumption and waste generation. By focusing on sustainability, hospitals aim to minimize their ecological footprint and conserve resources.

This increased focus on sustainability and the environment is another key factor in the single-use vs. reusable endoscope debate. Endoscopy is healthcare’s third-largest cause of medical waste in hospitals, according to a 2022 study published in the BMJ journal Gut. Single-use endoscopes, while offering convenience and sterility, contribute to the generation of medical waste.

On the other hand, reusable endoscopes have the potential to reduce the amount of waste generated in healthcare facilities. Although there is waste associated with reprocessing, it is still significantly less than what it would be with single-use endoscopes. A 2021 study published in Gut suggested that, “replacing reusable with single-use endoscopes and accounting for reduced waste from reprocessing of endoscopes would increase total waste mass by 40%.”

The choice between single-use endoscopes and reusable endoscopes is a complex decision that involves considerations of patient safety, financial implications and environmental impact. While single-use endoscopes offer advantages in terms of sterility and reduced risk of cross-contamination, they contribute to increased medical waste. Reusable endoscopes, on the other hand, can help reduce waste generation through proper reprocessing and extended use, but require significant investments in cleaning, maintenance and repairs.

Whether you are looking to maximize space with a high-density storage system for single-use endoscopes or need drying cabinets for reusable endoscopes, we can help. Storage Systems Unlimited offers a variety of storage cabinets to help meet your facility’s unique needs and requirements. For more information or to obtain a quote, contact us at 1-888-614-0004.

As medical facilities continue to evolve, the tools and equipment utilized by medical professionals must also adapt to meet the growing demands of the healthcare industry. Medical carts, specifically, have become a critical component, providing mobility and organization for medical equipment and supplies. When it comes to selecting a medical cart, one of the most important considerations is the material it is made of. In this blog post, we will explore the key differences between steel and aluminum metal carts, helping you make an informed decision for your healthcare facility.

Durability: Strength That Withstands Wear and Tear

Durability is an important factor when it comes to medical carts that ensure heavy usage and rough handling. While both steel and aluminum offer durability, steel is widely regarded as the stronger and more durable material. Its robustness enables it to withstand wear and tear, making it less likely to dent, scratch, break or bend.

Weight: Finding the Right Balance of Mobility

In many cases, a cart is meant to be moved—and the weight of medical carts plays a pivotal role in their mobility. Aluminum carts have gained popularity due to their lightweight nature, allowing healthcare employees to effortlessly maneuver them from one room to another. These carts offer ease of transportation without compromising on functionality. Conversely, steel carts are heavier and better suited for areas where they will be stationary, such as operating rooms, where stability and sturdiness take precedence over mobility.

Cost: Maximizing Your Investment

Financial considerations are important for any healthcare facility. Steel carts tend to be more cost-effective compared to aluminum carts. The abundance of steel as a material and the ease of its manufacturing contribute to its affordability. On the other hand, aluminum is a more expensive material, and it requires a more complex manufacturing process, thus making aluminum carts a pricier option.

Aesthetics: Balancing Functionality and Style

While functionality should take precedence, aesthetics can’t be overlooked. Steel carts exude an industrial look, which can be appropriate in some medical environments. On the other hand, aluminum carts offer a more modern and sleek appearance, which can complement contemporary healthcare facilities. Additionally, aluminum carts are available in a wider range of colors.

Finding the Perfect Fit for Your Facility

Selecting the right material for your medical cart is a decision that involves evaluating multiple factors, including durability, weight, cost, and aesthetics. Steel carts provide strength and affordability, making them an excellent choice for high-intensity environments. Alternatively, aluminum carts offer lightweight mobility and a modern appearance, catering to facilities where maneuverability and aesthetics are important. Ultimately, the decision between the two materials will depend on the unique needs and preferences of the medical facility.

If your facility needs updated medical carts, look no further. Storage Systems Unlimited is your one-stop shop for all your medical cart options. Need more guidance on selecting the right product for your hospital or department? Allow Storage Systems Unlimited help assess your needs and answer your questions. Contact us at 1-888-614-0004 or click here to request a quote.

Patient safety is a top priority in healthcare. Unfortunately, despite the measures that healthcare organizations take to keep patients safe and healthy, healthcare-acquired infections (HAIs) are a significant cause of illness and even death. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) says that at any given time, nearly 1 in 31 patients receiving in-patient care have an infection related to their hospital care.

A subset of these HAIs is endoscope-associated infections, which are caused by contaminated endoscopes that were not correctly reprocessed and sterilized. In October 2021, the American Journal of Gastroenterology issued an analysis of studies published from 2010 to 2020 and revealed that nearly 20% of reprocessed patient-ready gastrointestinal endoscopes may be contaminated with microorganisms.

Standards for reprocessing are necessary to reduce endoscope-associated infections. Organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates and the Association for the Advance of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) have all issued recommendations and guidelines for endoscope reprocessing programs.

In 2016, the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) and the CDC issued a report that recommended ways to reduce the risk of endoscope- and instrument-related HAIs.

In the report, the CDC and HICPAC say that healthcare facilities “should have a reliable, high-quality system for endoscope reprocessing which minimizes infection risks.” The report gives seven essential steps for high-quality cleaning and reprocessing:

1. Pre-cleaning. Following the device manufacturer’s instructions, staff should perform pre-cleaning immediately after the completion of the endoscope procedure to help prevent biofilm from forming.
2. Leak testing. If the endoscope requires leak testing, it should be performed after each use and prior to the manual cleaning. This helps detect damage to the endoscope.
3. Manual cleaning. Manual cleaning should be meticulous—and include “brushing and flushing channels and ports” consistent with the manufacturer’s instructions for use. HICPAC and the CDC call this “the most critical step in the disinfection process.”
4. Visual inspection. Reprocessing staff should conduct a thorough visual inspection of the endoscope and its accessories to ensure that they are clean and free of defects.
5. Disinfection or sterilization. After manual cleaning and visual inspection are complete, a high-level disinfection or sterilization should be performed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions for use.
6. Storage. When cleaning and reprocessing is complete, endoscopes and accessories should be stored in a way that prevents recontamination, protects against damage and promotes drying.
7. Documentation. Documentation of each step’s completion is necessary each time an endoscope is reprocessed for quality assurance purposes.

Why Drying and Storage Cabinets Are a Critical Part of Reprocessing

In March 2022, the AAMI released a report with a revised set of endoscope reprocessing guidelines. The AAMI’s updated recommendations include a “heightened focus on endoscope drying,” because the presence of moisture can increase the risk of infection, and storage recommendations.

Research, which was published in a 2008 issue of the Journal of Hospital Infection, found that when endoscopes were stored in a drying and storage cabinet, the “microbial contamination levels on endoscopes were lower than the number of bacteria initially introduced and could decrease considerably thereafter.” For endoscopes that were stored outside of the drying storage cabinet, the microbial numbers stayed the same or increased.

In the past, the AAMI wrote in a 2020 report, “many facilities stored patient-ready endoscopes in transport bins, in original endoscope boxes with foam inserts, and upright in cabinets with and without air flow.” Instead, the organization writes, storage solutions should have active air circulation, forced-air designs or both.

At Storage Systems Unlimited, we offer the InnerSpace Ventaire Scope Drying and Tracking Cabinet, which is compatible with all major endoscope brands, along with offerings from other manufacturers. “The Ventaire cabinet includes an automated system that provides consistent and continuous delivery of HEPA-filtered, pressurized air into all endoscope channels to keep scopes dry and vented,” InnerSpace explains.

The Ventaire cabinet’s 10-inch display screen shows real-time information, including endoscope locations, storage times, channel availability, and the temperature and humidity level inside the cabinet. It also displays the time before scopes are expired, and the system can generate a report detailing all scope activity—including when they are checked in and checked out.

Using the cabinet can help hospitals and healthcare organizations reduce the number of endoscope-associated infections and improve patient safety. To learn more or to get pricing on the InnerSpace Ventaire Scope Drying and Tracking Cabinet, contact us at 1-888-614-0004.