usa america flag flexicare

Frequently Asked Questions

thinking nurse faq flexicare

We have used reusable laryngoscopes for decades, why are disposable laryngoscopes needed now?

It is a new environment we work within today. There are new and resistant bacteria and viruses that we did not have 5 or 10 years ago. Healthcare is constantly evolving and as we become more sophisticated in our infection control practices we have learned how significant the potential for cross-contamination is from both laryngoscope blades and handles.
Studies show reprocessing reusable blades and handles sometimes does not fully remove proteins from medical devices.1 Additionally studies show that reusable handles present a significant risk of cross-contamination.
In one particular study, 86% of handles showed significant bacteria growth including Staph, Strep, and Bacillus.2 With hospital acquired infections (HAI’s) being closely monitored to enhance patient outcomes, changes in practices are being implemented to reduce HAI’s. Estimates for HAI’s are routinely found to be $40,000 per incident and up. BritePro Solo removes the risk of cross-contamination from reusable laryngoscopes handles and blades. It has been demonstrated going disposable has been shown to reduce overall intubation costs by 35% as compared to the cost of reprocessing and using reusables.


How much more does a disposable laryngoscope cost than my reusable laryngoscopes?

Over the last decade, significant improvements and changes in reprocessing guidelines for medical devices have not only improved, but have significantly increased costs as well. Under batch sterilization procedures, reusable laryngoscope blades and handles have been shown to cost an additional $17-$26 per intubation procedure.3 4 When factoring in the increased potential for cross-contamination, costs per intubation with a reusable laryngoscope can reach as much as $36 if only one hospital acquired infection occurs.3 BritePro Solo offers both improved patient care and reduced financial expense as compared to reusable laryngoscope blades and handles.


Does BritePro Solo come in adult and pediatric sizes?

BritePro Solo is available in Macintosh sizes 1-4 and Miller sizes 00-4 covering the full spectrum of both adult and pediatric patients.


What type of light is BritePro Solo?

BritePro Solo has an advanced LED light that matches the natural color spectrum of the sun, providing better tissue visualization and differentiation. One way to test this is to shine a light from a halogen or incandescent bulb laryngoscope under sunlight or fluorescent light. The light will show a yellowish tinge. When shining BritePro Solo under these conditions, the natural spectrum of light will match the light of BritePro Solo and the light will be ‘washed-out’ in the sunlight. However, when repeating this exercise in a dark area (imitating the airway of a patient) you will notice BritePro Solo has a whiter, brighter, and very focused light as compared to previous technologies.


How long do the batteries last for BritePro Solo?

BritePro Solo batteries provide over 1 hour of continuous light that can be turned on and off by engaging and disengaging the blade. Even in the most challenging cases you will have ample battery life and illumination to intubate your patient.


What is the environmental impact of going disposable as opposed to reusable?

Surprisingly, BritePro Solo is more environmentally friendly than utilizing reusable laryngoscope blades and handles. With the increased cleaning requirements today, reusable laryngoscopes undergo multiple chemical baths as part of the sterilization process. The introduction of toxic liquid chemicals into the environment is quite harmful. Additionally, the chemicals, detergent, sterile water, etc. require plastic packaging and bulky transportation that also increase their negative environmental impact.
With BritePro Solo, there is no chemical bath or enzymatic soaking required. Instead, BritePro Solo can be included in any existing hospital recycling program. Even if not recycled, the steel blade will rusts away and the overall weight of the plastic in the handle is small, leaving a smaller environmental footprint than the process associated with cleaning reusables.


We currently use disposable blades, but why should I also have a disposable handle?

In a 2010 study, 86% of laryngoscope handles that were not sterilized between each use were found to grow bacteria including staph, strep, and bacillus.2 Reusable laryngoscope handles are a proven vehicle in transmitting a variety of bacteria and viruses. This presents a significant risk of cross-contamination and documented compromise of patient outcomes. As such, the resolution is to either sterilize reusable handles or move to a disposable laryngoscope system. There are many drawbacks to sterilizing reusable handles:
Medical facilities will incur significant capital outlay to increase inventories of reusable handles by 200-400% to accommodate the reprocessing time between each use.3
The process of sterilization can significantly increase the failure rate of reusable handles. Hospitals that reprocess reusable handles report failure rates of up to 50% of the handles subjected to reprocessing.3 Increased failure rates of both conventional and fiberoptic laryngoscope handles reduces significantly the success rate of “first attempt intubations” and can cause a “simple intubation” to quickly become a “difficult intubation”.
The cost of cleaning reusable laryngoscope handles and blades is significant. Total reprocessing costs are shown to average $17-$26 per intubation.3 4


Is BritePro Solo sterile?

All BritePro Solo products are packaged 100% sterile.


Can I test to ensure the light works without opening the package?

Absolutely. Flexicare’s BritePro Solo is designed in a packaging that allows the light to be depressed and tested while in the packaging easily without breaking the sterile seal.


Can BritePro Solo be reused?

BritePro Solo is designed exclusively for single-use.


1 Vasquez C. Cost of Reprocessing Reusable Laryngoscopes. Glendale Adventist Hospital (2012)
Whitener D. The Cost of Reusable vs. Single-Use Larngoscopes. Southeast Health, (2012)
2 Ibid.
3 Williams D, Dingley J, Jones C, Berry N. Contamination of Laryngoscope Handles. Journal of Hospital Infection (2010) 74, 123-128
Amour J, Le Manach Y, Borel M. Comparison of Single-use and Reusable Metal Laryngoscope Blades for Orotracheal Intubation during Rapid Sequence Induction of Anesthesia. Anesthesiology (2010) 112:325–32
4 Vasquez C. Cost of Reprocessing Reusable Laryngoscopes. Glendale Adventist Hospital (2012)
Whitener D. The Cost of Reusable vs. Single-Use Larngoscopes. Southeast Health, (2012)
5 Nishiyama T. Changes in the Light Intensity of the Fiberoptic Laryngoscope Blade by Steam Sterilization. International Anesthesia Research Society. Vol. 104, No. 4, April 2007