Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to follow the instruments\' pathways and cost each segment to calculate whether reusable or disposable ophthalmic instruments offer better value for money for intravitreal injections.
METHODS: The cycles and costs of reusable and single-use disposable instruments used for intravitreal injections were mapped out, including purchase costs, transport to and from the place of use, opening and disposal, sterilisation, replacement, salary costs of staff involved, etc. results: The cost of using reusable instruments for intravitreal injections (NZ$29.00) was lower than the cost of using disposable instruments ($30.51) by $1.51 per patient.
CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal injections performed with reusable instruments offer better value for money than when performed with disposable instruments. This equates to a beneficial financial saving just for this one low-complexity case. Such savings can multiply significantly when considering the instruments used in a wider variety of ophthalmic procedures. There are of course trade-offs between safety, quality, cost and sustainability.
METHODS: The cycles and costs of reusable and single-use disposable instruments used for intravitreal injections were mapped out, including purchase costs, transport to and from the place of use, opening and disposal, sterilisation, replacement, salary costs of staff involved, etc. results: The cost of using reusable instruments for intravitreal injections (NZ$29.00) was lower than the cost of using disposable instruments ($30.51) by $1.51 per patient.
CONCLUSIONS: Intravitreal injections performed with reusable instruments offer better value for money than when performed with disposable instruments. This equates to a beneficial financial saving just for this one low-complexity case. Such savings can multiply significantly when considering the instruments used in a wider variety of ophthalmic procedures. There are of course trade-offs between safety, quality, cost and sustainability.
摘要：
目的：这项研究的目的是跟踪仪器的途径和每个环节的成本，以计算可重复使用或一次性眼科仪器是否为玻璃体内注射提供更高的性价比。
方法：列出了用于玻璃体内注射的可重复使用和一次性使用的一次性器械的周期和成本，包括购买成本，往返使用地点的运输，开放和处置，灭菌,replacement,涉及的工作人员的工资成本，等。结果:使用可重复使用的器械进行玻璃体内注射的费用(29.00新西兰元)比使用一次性器械的费用(30.51美元)低1.51美元.
结论：使用可重复使用的器械进行玻璃体内注射比使用一次性器械进行时提供更高的性价比。这相当于仅针对这一个低复杂性案例的有益财务节省。当考虑在更广泛的眼科手术中使用的仪器时,这样的节省可以显著地倍增。当然，在安全、质量,成本和可持续性。
方法：列出了用于玻璃体内注射的可重复使用和一次性使用的一次性器械的周期和成本，包括购买成本，往返使用地点的运输，开放和处置，灭菌,replacement,涉及的工作人员的工资成本，等。结果:使用可重复使用的器械进行玻璃体内注射的费用(29.00新西兰元)比使用一次性器械的费用(30.51美元)低1.51美元.
结论：使用可重复使用的器械进行玻璃体内注射比使用一次性器械进行时提供更高的性价比。这相当于仅针对这一个低复杂性案例的有益财务节省。当考虑在更广泛的眼科手术中使用的仪器时,这样的节省可以显著地倍增。当然，在安全、质量,成本和可持续性。
