Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLoftus, Terrence J.
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-09T01:21:57Z
dc.date.available2017-05-09T01:21:57Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.issn1932-6181
dc.identifier.othermed_009_04_044501.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/159191
dc.description.abstractReprocessing has emerged as an attempt to control the cost of singleuse bipolar and ultrasound diathermy devices despite limited data on defect rates. This study compares the defect rates, as reported by surgical teams, between original equipment manufacturer (OEM) singleuse bipolar and ultrasound diathermy devices and reprocessed (RP) devices. Data were retrospectively collected on 3112 devices over a 7month period for two types of bipolar and ultrasound diathermy devices. There is a significant difference (p < 0.001) in reported bipolar and ultrasound diathermy device defects between OEM and RP. OEM singleuse bipolar and ultrasound diathermy devices were reported to be defective more frequently than RP devices based on reports from the surgical team.
dc.publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
dc.titleA Comparison of the Defect Rate Between Original Equipment Manufacturer and Reprocessed Single Use Bipolar and Ultrasound Diathermy Devices
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume9
dc.journal.issue4
dc.journal.titleJournal of Medical Devices
dc.identifier.doi10.1115/1.4030858
dc.journal.fristpage44501
dc.journal.lastpage44501
dc.identifier.eissn1932-619X
dc.treeJournal of Medical Devices:;2015:;volume( 009 ):;issue: 004
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record