论文部分内容阅读
目的通过对两台CR和DR机作测试比较,分别求得CR和DR在实际运行中各自的人均检查成本,反映两种机种不同的综合运行成本,可供医院管理层人员参考。方法分别实际测试每一个患者每次检查所花费的平均检查时间,而计算出该台设备使用率在80%的情况下每天可检查的人数,再分别根据两台设备的投资成本和运行成本,除以每天可检查人数,得出人均检查成本。结果CR机和DR机使用率在80%时每天可检查人数分别为82人和154人,通过计算分别得出CR系统和DR系统假定每天检查人数为100人时,其人均检查成本分别为10.92元和11.81元;假定CR和DR每天检查人数增为200人时,则CR和DR的人均成本分别为7.19和5.98元。结论当一天的患者人数少于80人时,CR的检查成本相对比DR较为低;患者数在80-100人/天时CR和DR两者成本差别不大;但一天患者检查人数多于100人时则DR系统的检查成本相对更低。文中还围绕影响工作效率的其他因素,对CR和DR各自的优点和不足作了评价。
OBJECTIVE To test the per capita cost of CR and DR in actual operation by comparing and testing two CR and DR machines, which reflects the different comprehensive operating costs of the two models and is available for reference by hospital management personnel. Methods The actual examination of the average examination time spent by each patient in each examination was separately calculated, and the number of people who can check the usage of the apparatus at 80% of the time was calculated. Based on the investment cost and operating cost of the two apparatuses respectively, Divided by the number of people can be checked per day, come to check the cost per capita. Results CR and DR systems were tested at 82% and 154 days respectively at 80% utilization rate. The CR system and DR system were calculated respectively. Assuming that the daily inspection number was 100, the per capita examination costs were 10.92 Yuan and 11.81 yuan. Assuming CR and DR increase to 200 in a day, the average cost of CR and DR will be 7.19 yuan and 5.98 yuan respectively. Conclusion When the number of patients in a day is less than 80, the cost of CR examination is relatively lower than that of DR. When the number of patients is 80-100 people / day, the difference between CR and DR is not very different; however, the number of patients with a day more than 100 When the DR system is relatively cheaper to check. The paper also evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of CR and DR, focusing on other factors that affect work efficiency.