fort level with the instrument. This is especially true for oph-
thalmic blades.
"I like a non-disposable diamond blade because it's the sharpest
instrumentation available," says T. Hunter Newsom, MD, a cataract and
refractive surgeon and the founder of the Newsom Eye & Laser Center
in Sebring and Tampa, Fla. But Dr. Newsom is the outlier in his own
practice, where the other surgeons all prefer to use disposable knives.
"They like that the disposable steel blades aren't quite as sharp, so
they're more forgiving," says Dr. Newsom. "You can lean a little to the
right and it's not going to extend the incision. You can't do that with
the diamond blade. You have to go straight in, and straight out."
Durability is an important consideration to keep in mind when
deciding between reusable vs. disposable products. Consider the
example of iris expansion devices, which cost around $50 for single-
use options and $125 to $150 for multi-use versions. If you can use the
reusable ones five, six or seven times, your cost per case drops down
to $20 to $30, which is less than the cost of the disposable model. But
here's where it's critical for surgical facility leaders to understand the
skills of their surgeons. "If you have a surgeon who's taking what's
supposed to be a multi-use device and consistently getting just one
use out of it [due to damage], you're probably going to need to invest
in disposables," says Dr. Newsom.
Cost concerns
Of course, cost is a major consideration when it comes to dispos-
ables. But this isn't as cut-and-dried as it first appears. Diamond
blades cost around $3,000 per knife which, of course, is a lot. But then
again, Dr. Newsom performs around 3,000 cataract procedures annu-
ally, and has invested in 16 diamond blades — a $48,000 investment.
Now, compare those costs to disposable steel blades, which can run
F E B R U A R Y 2 0 2 0 • O U T PA T I E N T S U R G E R Y. N E T • 7 9
