Cost Comparison of 2 Video Laryngoscopes in a Large Academic Center: JCOM

Objective: Retrospective study examining hospital cost information of patients requiring endotracheal intubation with video laryngoscopy. Provide a practical cost assessment on use of the McGRATH and GlideScope video laryngoscopes (VLs). Methods: This study examined 52 hospital locations within a single, large university hospital, with most of those locations being hospital operating rooms. A total of 34 600 endotracheal intubations performed over 24 months, of which 11 345 were video laryngoscopies. Electronic medical records containing demographic data and information related to endotracheal intubation procedures, with monthly breakdowns between GlideScope and McGRATH intubations, were reviewed. Cost information calculated for equipment, blades, batteries, repairs, and subsequent analysis performed to determine cost differences between those 2 instruments during the COVID-19 period. Results: A total of 5501 video laryngoscopy procedures were performed using the McGRATH VL and 5305 were performed using the GlideScope VL. Costs over 24 months were $181 093 lower (55.5%) for McGRATH compared to GlideScope. The mean (SD) monthly costs for GlideScope blades were $3837 ($1050) and $3236 ($538) for years 1 and 2, respectively, vs $1652 ($663) and $2933 ($585) for McGRATH blades (P<.001). Most total cost differences were attributed to equipment and blade purchases, which were $202 595 (65.0%) higher for GlideScope. During the COVID-19 period, the use of the McGRATH increased to 61% of all video laryngoscopy cases, compared to 37% for GlideScope (P<.001). Blade cost difference for the COVID19 period was $128 higher for the McGRATH even though 293 more intubations were performed with that device. Conclusions: Use of the McGRATH resulted in a cost savings of 55% compared to the GlideScope, and its use was highest during the COVID-19 period, which may be explained by its more portable and practical features.

Preferential use of total intravenous anesthesia in ambulatory otolaryngology surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) pandemic has impacted nearly every aspect of otolaryngologic practice. The transition from office-based evaluation to telemedicine and the number of postponed elective surgical cases is unprecedented. There is a significant need to resume elective surgical care for these patients at the appropriate time. As practices begin to move towards resuming elective and same day ambulatory surgery, safety of both the patient and healthcare team is of paramount importance. Usage of total intravenous anesthesia (propofol and remifentanil) over volatile gas anesthesia (e.g., sevoflurane) may increase the number of patients able to safely receive care by reducing potential spread of the virus through reduction in coughing and significantly decreasing the time spent in the recovery room.