Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(8)
Over the course of a day, the per scope time savings translated into a savings of 6.2 hours of time spent in the reprocessing laboratory and almost 2 hours of technician direct labour time alone.
But wouldn't it be nice if we could do that once per scope rather than at every call site?
**Does not include acquisition cost of either processor With shorter cycles in EVOTECH ECR, the total per scope time saved would be 374 minutes per day.
While the cost of consumable supplies required for endoscope processing and reprocessor maintenance was slightly higher with EVOTECH ECR ($8.91 vs. $8.31 per scope), the reduced labour cost more than offset the higher cost of consumed and disposable supplies such that the total per scope costs were $11.50 with EVOTECH ECR and $11.88 with manual cleaning plus AER.
With a weighted average total reprocessing time of 38 minutes per scope for all scope types processed in EVOTECH ECR, an additional 9.84 scopes could be processed every day and 2, 558 additional scopes could be processed each year.
The number of minutes taken in the reprocessing of all scopes for a typical day was calculated by multiplying the number of each scope type by the observed average number of minutes per scope.
Similar(52)
The list of topics can be extended as per the scope and goal of scientific writing instruction.
The comparator, as per the scope, was no mechanical prophylaxis, and the subgroup analysis related to the use of pharmaceutical prophylaxis (i.e. combined prophylaxis) and to stroke patients.
Fig. 1 Evolution of cost per airways management (EUR) when using one reusable scope per 50 airways managements per year comparing with single-use scopes.
Including the cost of labour consumed in reprocessing scopes, the per cycle and annual costs of using the EVOTECH ECR was less than the cost of using the AER ($11.50 versus $11.88) as shown in Table 7.
Including the cost of direct labour time consumed in reprocessing scopes, the per cycle and annual costs of using the EVOTECH ECR was less than the cost of manual cleaning followed by AER disinfection ($11.50 versus $11.88).
More suggestions(1)
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com