• Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
  • Hormone Therapy
  • Genomic Testing
  • Next-Generation Imaging
  • UTUC
  • OAB and Incontinence
  • Genitourinary Cancers
  • Kidney Cancer
  • Men's Health
  • Pediatrics
  • Female Urology
  • Sexual Dysfunction
  • Kidney Stones
  • Urologic Surgery
  • Bladder Cancer
  • Benign Conditions
  • Prostate Cancer

Dr. Barquin on single-use vs reusable cystoscopes


"Anecdotally, I would say that many providers actually prefer the functionality of the single-use cystoscopes," says David Barquin, MD.

In this video, David Barquin, MD, discusses the Urology paper, “The Impact of Single-Use Cystoscopes on Clinical Time Workflow in an Outpatient Setting.” Barquin is a urology resident at Duke University School of Medicine in Durham, North Carolina.


Beyond the observed clinic days, did you track any potential downsides to the switch, such as increased costs associated with single-use cystoscopes or limitations in their functionality compared with resuable scopes?

This is not something that we focused on in our study. But there have been several other studies that demonstrate that functionality wise, single-use is on par with flexible reusable scopes. Anecdotally, I would say that many providers actually prefer the functionality of the single-use cystoscopes. And in regards to cost, the data out there are mixed, but they suggest that single-use is more cost effective in clinical settings with lower annual volumes. However, these studies don't account for the potential increase in clinical capacity, which we found in our study. It would be interesting to see how that factors into future cost-analysis studies.

Your study suggests a significant increase in procedures performed after the transition. Were there any changes in patient selection criteria or urgency levels that might have contributed to this increase in volume?

No, there were no changes in patient selection or in the urgency of getting patients into clinic. After the transition, the patient capacity of the clinics improved due to the time savings, and also us not being limited by the fixed number of reusable scopes we had at our center.

Considering the potential benefits of single-use cystoscopes for efficiency and infection control, what are your thoughts on their broader adoption in outpatient urology settings?

I think the data out there demonstrate that transitioning to single-use scopes can have its benefits, but also its limitations. Those vary by the type of practice, the clinical volume at that practice, and the payer system. I think as industry continues to come up with more single-use scopes, we'll see more studies similar to ours that will shed further light on this topic. Ultimately, our study demonstrates that transition to single-use scopes at our institution led to improvement in access to care for our patients.

This transcription was edited for clarity.

Related Videos
Blur image of hospital corridor | Image Credit: © whyframeshot - stock.adobe.com
Gamal M. Ghoniem, MD, FACS, ABU/FPMRS, gives an answer during a video interview
Edward M. Schaeffer, MD, PhD, answers a question during a Zoom video interview
Zhina Sadeghi, MD, answers a question during a video interview
Stephanie Gleicher, MD, answers a question during a Zoom video interview
Human kidney cross section on scientific background | © Crystal light - stock.adobe.com
Mature woman with her doctor | Image Credit: © pucko_ns - stock.adobe.com
Related Content
© 2024 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.