Dual Versus Single Needle EBUS Procedure Efficiency and Cost Analysis

126 adult patients were enrolled in a prospective, single-blind, multi-center randomized controlled trial comparing single and dual needle use in EBUS-TBNA procedures. The dataset contains results on primary outcomes like time per needle pass and secondary outcomes including cost-benefit analysis, diagnostic yield, and carbon impact. It was authored by figshare admin karger and last updated in April 2026.

Use Cases

• Compare time_per_needle_pass and total_procedure_time between single and dual needle groups to model procedural efficiency.
• Analyze the relationship between number_of_needle_passes and diagnostic_yield or NGS_sufficiency metrics.
• Use the cost-benefit_analysis data, including anesthesia_cost and needle_price, to build a customizable economic model for hospital adoption.
• Evaluate the carbon_impact data to assess the environmental footprint of different procedural approaches.

Strengths

• Data from a randomized controlled trial with 126 patient records.
• Includes multiple outcome measures: time metrics, cost analysis, diagnostic yield (96.0%), and NGS sufficiency (93.6%).
• Provides specific statistical results, such as mean time per needle pass (56.2 vs. 82.1 seconds) with p-values.

Limitations

• Small dataset at 168.3 KB, indicating limited scope and sample size of 126 patients.
• Unknown number of rows and specific columns, limiting detailed feature analysis.
• Geographic coverage of the multi-center trial is unspecified, which may limit generalizability.

Provenance

Source

figshare, authored by figshare admin karger.

Collection Method

Prospective, single-blind, multi-center randomized controlled trial.

Time Range

Temporal coverage of the clinical trial is not specified.

Freshness

Last updated in April 2026, indicating current data.

Geography

Multi-center trial, but specific geographic locations are unknown.