ABSTRACT
Introduction: Studies have highlighted the advantages and disadvantages of woven and non‑woven fabrics. The present study assessed the change in resterilisation proportion after introduction of non‑woven fabric for packaging of instruments and to evaluate the cost‑effectiveness of non‑woven fabrics compared with woven fabrics. Materials and Methods: The present study is a secondary data analysis of resterilisation data collected from November 2009 to August 2013. We calculated the proportions (and their 95% confidence intervals) of resterilisation done every month. The proportion over time was compared using a Chi‑square test for trend. We used linear regression analysis to adjust for the number of surgeries performed every month. We also compared the cost of woven and non‑woven fabrics. Results: Of the total 117,335 surgical packets prepared during the study period, 1900 were resterilised; thus, the overall proportion was 1.62% (95% CI: 1.55% to 1.69%). The resterilisation proportion was 8.95% (95% CI: 7.73% to 10.17%) in November 2009 and was 0.38% (95% CI: 0.16% to 0.62%) in August 2013 (P < 0.001). After adjusting for the total number of surgeries conducted every month, we found that the number of packets resterilised reduced every month (per month reduction: ‑ 1.97, 95% CI: ‑ 2.76 to ‑1.18). The total cost (initial preparation and resterilisation) for 100 units of woven fabric is INR 6359.41 per month (confidence limit estimates: 6228.20 to 6430.62) and for non‑woven fabric was INR 6208.50 (confidence limit estimate: INR 6194.90 to 6223.35) (P < 0.01). Conclusions: The introduction of non‑woven spunbond‑meltblown‑spunbond fabrics did reduce the proportion of resterilisation of packaged instruments. The decline was sharp and sustained over time, even after accounting for the change in the number of procedures. Furthermore, though the switch from woven to non‑woven fabric was cost‑effective in our situation, it may not be directly translated to other scenarios.