August 1999 -
[Cached Version]
Published on: 8/1/1999
Last Visited: 3/11/2001
It makes more sense to let federal OSHA take care of it , says Kevin Seifert , director of business development and policy.We support the legislative action in the form of the Stark bill because it's a mechanism to make OSHA react..
BD introduced the first safety-engineered device - a safety syringe - 11 years ago , but in the past 11 years , conversion to safety devices just didn't happen in most product areas , Seifert notes.
Supplier says costs are overstated.
...
However , Seifert says company estimates show that for an average 300-bed hospital converting to safer products in the categories of syringes and needles , blood collection devices , and IV catheters , the increased cost would be about $ 71 , 000 per year.
For the budget size of a 300-bed institution , I wouldn't think that would be viewed as crippling or even substantial , he says.It's not the millions that many people sometimes automatically think it is..
While costs of different product categories vary widely , Seifert notes that conventional needles cost 6 cents to 8 cents each , while safer versions cost 22 cents to 25 cents each.He expects that as demand volume increases , as it would if all hospitals were required to purchase safer devices , prices for those devices would decrease.
In fiscal year 1998 , 29 % of the company's revenues from its needle-based medical device businesses came from safety-engineered products.
...
A variety of conventional devices still would be in use after legislation or regulation , either due to patient safety considerations or because safer technology is not available or necessary , so Seifert cannot presently predict how that percentage might change after widespread device conversion.
We're in favor of good legislation that allows for good patient care , end-user selection of technology they want to use , and no prevention of advancement to future technologies , he states.If the law says the customer chooses what product they think is the most appropriate , and if it's effective and protects the worker , why wouldn't we want to support that.We're assuming this is coming and we're preparing for it..