"Yes, there is nothing wrong with this formula for calculating the cost of running equipment.

The previous part of calculating the total operating expenses can find the basis and get more accurate results.

However, the number of times this device will be used in the next five years is a difficult number to determine.

Because there are so many factors that can affect this value.

The longevity of the equipment and whether it will be replaced by more advanced equipment in the future is unpredictable. ”

"Medical devices generally have a warranty period, and I think you can multiply the number of days in the warranty period by the number of times the device is used per day to calculate a relatively accurate number of uses.

Although there must be a certain amount of error in this way, all the equipment detection information in the SAR can be counted through the platform.

Therefore, we can also revise the original charging standard according to the number of times the equipment is used again when the equipment runs for a month or a year, so that a more accurate accounting result can be formed.

In my opinion, this dynamic price verification method can continuously dynamically adjust the detection price, so as to form a more reasonable charging standard. ”

"If a piece of equipment is designed to last five years, but when it's in service for two years, it's replaced by another, more advanced piece of equipment.

In such a case, the actual service life of such a device becomes two years.

So, your way of calculating still can't cope with such a situation. ”

"I don't think there are many of them.

The popularization of a new technology also takes time to test, and it does not mean that the original testing equipment can be replaced immediately as soon as the new equipment is launched.

This is because doctors must consider whether the new test technology is more accurate, whether it is significantly helpful in diagnosing the disease, whether it has a cheaper test cost, whether it has a faster test time, and whether it is less harmful to the body of the test subject. ”

"Yes, if a new testing equipment cannot be comprehensively surpassed in the aspects mentioned above, even if the original equipment only has a certain advantage, it is also the reason why this equipment can continue to operate."

Also, for a doctor who is used to the results of the old device, it may take some time for him to adopt the test report of the new device right away.

Because he had to understand the new parameters in the new equipment test report and what they mean.

Otherwise, as a doctor, you don't even know how to analyze the results of the test report, or even ignore those test items that you are not familiar with and affect the patient's diagnosis, it is easy to fall into the medical responsibility.

This is very detrimental to doctors.

As a result, physicians who are content with the status quo and do not accept new devices will certainly continue to rely on their own familiar testing equipment to help diagnose. ”

"Well, I think it's okay to keep it running since old equipment isn't so easy to replace.

After all, if this happens, we can also increase the use of older equipment by reducing the cost of testing.

For example, CT machines in hospitals have become a basic configuration.

However, ordinary CT machines only cost more than one million, while high-end CT machines may cost tens of millions.

Although high-end CT machines are more functional and have clearer images, they do not need so many functions and too high clarity for different patients.

According to the formula you just proposed, the more expensive the equipment, the higher the operating costs.

A tenfold price difference will bring at least five times the difference in charges.

In other words, if a patient can be diagnosed with a hundred dollars, why choose the 500 yuan once testing equipment? ”

"Yes, the more experienced a doctor is, the less dependent he is on medical testing equipment.

Since some conditions only require a simple diagnosis, why should patients choose more expensive tests?

I think that medical equipment should be high, medium and low-end, and then the attending doctor will decide which detection method is more appropriate. ”

"Since those old devices are not so easy to obsolete, I think it should be most reasonable to adopt the method of dynamically adjusting the charging standard.

However, the adjustment time of this fee price should be fixed and become a system that must be followed. ”

"It is certainly the largest error to calculate the charging standard using the number of uses on the first day, so the first correction should be made when the charging standard is implemented for one month.

However, for the human body, it is very susceptible to the effects of the climate.

Different seasons may also produce a specific infectious disease, resulting in changes in the number of times the detection equipment is used in different seasons.

Therefore, the charging standard should be revised again when the equipment is put into operation for a quarter.

In order to truly smooth out the differences between the different seasons of the year, the charging standards should also be revised again when the equipment has been in use for one year.

With such multiple corrections, it should be possible to find a reasonable charge for such equipment. ”

"One day, one month, one quarter, and one year, that is, it needs to be revised four times.

However, there are different types of months, and the number of days in each quarter is not the same.

The year has the least impact, but there are also leap and common years.

Although the difference in the number of days is not large, it will always affect the uniformity of the pricing mechanism.

Therefore, I suggest that the timing of the revision of the fee standard be determined by the exact number of days.

For example, change the above nodes to 1 day, 30 days, 90 days, and 365 days.

In this way, the program can automatically revise the charging standard at the relevant node through the operation time, number of uses, equipment price and operating cost registered by each device in the platform. ”

"This method is good, if the charging standard of each testing equipment has to be manually corrected, it is estimated that a special medical testing fee pricing bureau will be set up to be busy.

Human intervention is certainly not as accurate as automated programmatic intervention, and there is a possibility of omissions.

If each device could adjust its own charges based on its usage, there would be no arbitrary charges. ”

"However, there is still a problem with this pricing mechanism, that is, after the equipment has fully recovered its cost, it is necessary to recalculate the price of the equipment."

"If the costs have already been fully recovered, it is certainly not appropriate to include the price of the equipment in the operating costs.

Therefore, I believe that every time the charging standard is revised, the profit generated in the early operation should be subtracted from the price of the equipment.

Moreover, in addition to those four correction nodes, there should be a condition that triggers the correction process, that is, when the entire investment is recovered. ”

"If you do this, you are likely to cause a significant reduction in the cost of a certain device, which will cause confusion for patients.

Because the same test item may have different charging standards. ”

"I think this is understandable, after all, the error of the new equipment will definitely be smaller than the old equipment, and it is reasonable to have a higher cost.

If after the first four nodes, add another correction node every year to continuously reduce the proportion of equipment price in the total operating expenses.

When the equipment investment is fully recovered, the change in the charging standard is not so obvious. ”