MTMC Diagnostic Lab
Kelly A. Barker
Middle Tennessee State University
Clinical Site

MTMC Diagnostic Lab


MTMC is a private, non-profit facility
Includes:






Cardiac catherization lab (angioplasty and stent
placement)
GI Lab (colonoscopy and bronchoscopy)
Echo
EKG
Exercise treadmill test and nuclear stress test
Pacemaker implantation
Preceptor: Cathy Alber

Role:





Facilitation of the budget
Professional recruitment
Creating staff work schedules
Visionary preparing for the future
Mixed leadership style (both democratic
and autocratic)
Leadership Project


Purpose: determine the total cost effectiveness of
the MEDRAD Avanta Injector system
Leadership project objectives:
1. Calculate the average savings per patient by
using the Isovue contrast vs. the Vispaque
contrast
2. Calculate the average monthly savings by using
the Isovue contrast vs. the Vispaque contrast
3. Calculate the average monthly savings of
patients not requiring femoral artery closure
devices after cardiac catherizations secondary
to smaller catheter size
4. Evaluate the monthly cost effectiveness of the
MEDRAD Avanta Injection system
MEDRAD Injector (Old)
MEDRAD Avanta Injector
(New)
- Vispaque contrast: $1.00/mL
- Average amount of contrast
used: 107 mL/patient
- Contrast waste with each
procedure
- 6F catheter (larger diameter)
- Increased usage of femoral
artery closure devices
(approximately $200 per device)
- Isovue Contrast: ¢0.67/mL
- Average amount of contrast used:
90 mL/patient
- No contrast wasted during
procedures
- 4F catheter
- Decreased usage of femoral artery
closure devices
Monetary Savings Using Isovue
Contrast vs. Vispaque Contrast


The Isovue contrast
used with the
MEDRAD Avanta
System is ¢0.33
cheaper than the
Vispaque contrast
Saves an average of
$47 per patient and
$2,700 per month.
Monetary Savings from Decreased use of
Femoral Artery Closure Devices
The smaller 4F catheter used with the MEDRAD
Avanta Injector as opposed to the 6F catheter
reduces the amount of femoral closure devices
used during each cardiac catherization.
Percentage of Patients who received femoral
Artery Closure Devices
60%
50%
Percentage

40%
30%
20%
55%
41%
10%
18%
0%
July
August
July
August
September
September
Monetary Savings from Decreased use of
Femoral Artery Closure Devices



The average cost of femoral artery closure devices
in July and August was $6,100 per month
The average cost of closure devices in September
was only $2,000
The MEDRAD Avanta Injector will save an
average of $4,100 by using fewer closure devices
Monthly Cost Effectiveness of the MEDRAD
Avanta Injection System



Overall, the MEDRAD Avanta Injector will save
approximately $6,800 per month
The MEDRAD Avanta Injector cost roughly
$24,000
By saving $6,800 per month, the injection system
should recoup its cost in 4 months
Unique Aspect of the Diagnostic Lab



The most unique aspect of my experience at the
diagnostic lab was Cathy’s excellent leadership
style.
She is willing to help in anyway possible, from
assisting with GI procedures to changing linens on
a bed.
She communicates well with the staff members
and involves them in decision making.
Strengths and Opportunities for
Improvement in the Diagnostic Lab

Strengths:





Experienced nurses and staff members
Excellent director
Technologically advanced equipment
Large lab with multiple procedure rooms
Opportunities for improvement:




Staffing
Cross training nurses to work in all labs
Excess on-call hours
Transport difficulties and excess waiting time for
patients to leave the facility
Recommendations for the Diagnostic
Lab



Hire more nurses thus decreasing on-call and OT
hours for other staff members
Cross train nurses to work in all labs
Take patients out of the facility when transport is
busy to decrease waiting time for patients and
family members
PICO Question
P
I
In patients
will using a
undergoing
4F catheter
cardiac
catherizations
C
instead of a
6F catheter
O
affect patient
outcomes
(holding
manual
pressure,
hemorrhage,
ambulation)