accommodate your case volume
and instrument use.
When our surgery center
recently added orthopedic
procedures, I compared the cost
of buying blue wrap with the
purchase price of rigid
containers. The numbers
showed that rigid containers
were a cost-effective option for
sterilizing high-use instruments,
such as arthroscopic cameras, arthroscopes and shavers.
Here's a closer look at the numbers: It costs us $305 for a 11.25" by
11.75" by 5.5" container and $345 for a 18.5" by 11.5" by 5.5" container.
The size you'll need depends on the number and type of instruments
you have in constant rotation (see "Rigid Containers: Size Matters").
Filterless containers feature integrated holes in the lid that let steam
escape, while other containers require the purchase of single-use
filters — you can buy 1,000 for less than $75. All rigid containers have
locks and indicator systems on the outside surface that you can check
with a quick glance to see if the contents have been sterilized.
The container we ended up purchasing requires 2 lid locks, which
cost about 25 cents per load. Disposable filters cost 7 cents each, so
we spend about 32 cents per load to use rigid containers. Blue wrap,
on the other hand, costs $2.67 for a 48" by 48" sheet. Smaller
segments of blue wrap are cheaper: $1.42 for a 36" by 36" segment,
which we use most often to wrap our instrument sets, and 62 cents
for a 24" by 24" piece. As you can see, in our case, buying blue wrap
ends up being more expensive per load than investing in the single-
use components needed for rigid containers.
5 0 • O U T PA T I E N T S U R G E R Y M A G A Z I N E • M A y 2 0 1 8
You need adequate
case volume to
support the switch
to rigid containers.
