Last in a four-part series


SPECIAL REPORT


Four ways high-quality medical supplies can help reduce the cost of care


T


he shift from volume to value-based care, with declining reimbursements and penalties for hospital-acquired


conditions (HACs) and readmissions, have forced health systems and hospitals to find ways to improve uality of care while reducing costs. Reducing the per capita cost of healthcare1


is a pillar in the


Triple Aim initiative of the Institute for Healthcare Improvment (IHI). With supplies being the second largest area of expense for hospitals, product procurement is a key consideration. But it is not just about negotiating the lowest price for a product. A critical factor for healthcare organizations to consider is the impact product choices have on patients from admission through discharge and beyond. Furthermore, with labor being the largest expense area for hospitals, product selection must also take into account the impact on staff efficiency and workows. While high-volume, low-cost medical supplies and accessories have small price tags, their impact on clinical outcomes and cost can be significant. ince these prod- ucts (e.g., blood pressure cuffs, breathing circuits/components, ECG leads, tempera- ture probes) come into direct contact with patients, they have significant potential to deliver clinical ben- efits or compromise safety. Here are four factors to consider when purchasing medical sup- plies and accessories to maximize the value of these products, pro- tect patient safety and streamline workows.


1. Single use for safety Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) result in tens of thousands of patient deaths, and billions of dollars in costs annually.2 Medical supplies that touch the patient have a higher source of infection risk and human error. For example, one study found even after disinfection, more than 77 percent of ECG leads were contaminated with at least one resistant pathogen.3


To reduce the risk for dangerous and costly hpnonline.com • HEALTHCARE PURCHASING NEWS • November 2020 57


HAIs, hospitals are increasingly adopting single use products to help reduce cross contamination.


2. Minimize waste eek out medical supplies with the best durability and performance to reduce waste on products that are unacceptable right out of the packaging or must be replaced before patient discharge. This can also reduce the volume of supplies thrown away because they are ineffective or not tolerated by the patient.


3. Save clinical time and labor Clinician time is precious – and costly – therefore hospitals must find ways to keep clinicians focused on patient care rather than supply management. Purchase high-quality supplies that hold up to use in the challenging healthcare environ- ment to stop clinical staff from having to frequently track down replacement products and reapply them. upplies that can be used with a variety of manufactur- ers’ devices when used with appropriate adapters and trunk cables also save money and increase efficiency. he use of kits is another way to simplify supply use for


clinicians. When a manufacturer bundles commonly used products together in a single kit it frees up clinicians to spend more time with patients instead of hunt- ing for supplies.


4. Standardize for savings When a hospital consolidates spend on supplies and accessories with a single vendor it is in a better negotiating posi- tion to secure volume discounts from the contracted vendor. Consolidation also reduces Us, improves training and safety, and makes reordering easier. HPN


For more information on how high-quality medical supplies and accessories can help your organization reduce the cost of care, read this Frost & Sullivan white paper: Compromised Safety Can Lead to Reimbursement Penalties and Lower Patient Volumes as a Facility’s Reputation for Quality Care Suffers.


References


1 The IHI Triple Aim, http://www.ihi.org/engage/initiatives/ TripleAim/Pages/default.aspx


2 https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primers/primer/7/health-care- associated-infections


3 B. Jancin, “Antibiotic-resistant pathogens found on 77% of ECG lead wires,” Cardiology News, March 2004.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66