Eco-responsibility in the operating theater: An urgent need for organizational transformation

How a hospital pharmacist can contribute to a more sustainable operating theater

Healthcare sectors, particularly operating theaters, are major consumers of resources. Given today's climate-related issues, its seems vital that the different healthcare professionals in operating areas become aware of their roles. This is pronouncedly the case for hospital pharmacists, who fulfill cross-sectional functions in the proper use and management of healthcare products and sterile medical devices. The objective of this review of the literature is to identify the actions a hospital pharmacist can take to impel evolution toward ecologically responsible care in the operating theater. Seven areas in which a pharmacist can assume a leading, supporting or composite role in rendering an operating theater ecologically responsible have been highlighted: purchasing, procurement and storage, harmonization of practices, modification of practices, professional attire, waste elimination and research/teaching. The active participation of all healthcare professionals, including the hospital pharmacist, is essential to the development of a sustainable approach to healthcare.

How we can reduce the environmental impact of our operating theatres: a narrative review

Climate change is projected to become the leading cause of adverse health outcomes globally, and the healthcare system is a key contributor. Surgical theatres are three to six times more pollutant than other hospital areas, and produce anywhere from a fifth to a third of total hospital waste. Hospitals are increasingly expected to make operating theatres more sustainable, however guidelines to improve environmental sustainability are lacking, and previous research takes a narrow approach to operative sustainability. This paper presents a narrative review that, following a 'review of reviews' approach, aims to summarize the key recommendations to improve the environmental sustainability of surgical theatres. Key domains of discussion identified across the literature included minimisation of volatile anaesthetics, reduction of operating theatre power consumption, optimisation of surgical approach, re-use and re-processing of surgical instruments, waste management, and research, education and leadership. Implementation of individual items in these domains has seen significant reductions in the environmental impact of operative practice. This comprehensive summary of recommendations lays the framework from which providers can assess the sustainability of their practice and for the development of encompassing guidelines to build an environmentally sustainable surgical service.

Guidelines for reducing the environmental impact of general anaesthesia

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines for reducing the environmental impact of general anaesthesia.

DESIGN

A committee of ten experts from SFAR and SF2H and SFPC learned societies was set up. A policy of declaration of competing interests was applied and observed throughout the guideline-writing process. Likewise, it did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product (drug or medical device). The committee followed the GRADE® method (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based.

METHODS

We aimed to formulate recommendations according to the GRADE® methodology for three different fields: anaesthesia vapours and gases; intravenous drugs; medical devices and the working environment. Each question was formulated according to the PICO format (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome). The literature review and recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The experts' work on the synthesis and application of the GRADE® method led to the formulation of 17 recommendations. Since the GRADE® method could not be entirely applied to all of the questions, some of the recommendations were formulated as expert opinions.

CONCLUSION

Based on strong agreement between experts, we produced 17 recommendations designed to guide reducing the environmental impact of general anaesthesia.

Operating in a Climate Crisis: A State-of-the-Science Review of Life Cycle Assessment within Surgical and Anesthetic Care

BACKGROUND

Both human health and the health systems we depend on are increasingly threatened by a range of environmental crises, including climate change. Paradoxically, health care provision is a significant driver of environmental pollution, with surgical and anesthetic services among the most resource-intensive components of the health system.

OBJECTIVES

This analysis aimed to summarize the state of life cycle assessment (LCA) practice as applied to surgical and anesthetic care via review of extant literature assessing environmental impacts of related services, procedures, equipment, and pharmaceuticals.

METHODS

A state-of-the-science review was undertaken following a registered protocol and a standardized, LCA-specific reporting framework. Three bibliographic databases (Scopus®, PubMed, and Embase®) and the gray literature were searched. Inclusion criteria were applied, eligible entries critically appraised, and key methodological data and results extracted.

RESULTS

From 1,316 identified records, 44 studies were eligible for inclusion. The annual climate impact of operating surgical suites ranged between 3,200,000 and 5,200,000 kg CO2e. The climate impact of individual surgical procedures varied considerably, with estimates ranging from 6 to 1,007 kg CO2e. Anesthetic gases; single-use equipment; and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system operation were the main emissions hot spots identified among operating room- and procedure-specific analyses. Single-use equipment used in surgical settings was generally more harmful than equivalent reusable items across a range of environmental parameters. Life cycle inventories have been assembled and associated climate impacts calculated for three anesthetic gases (2-85 kg CO2e/MAC-h) and 20 injectable anesthetic drugs (0.01-3.0 kg CO2e/gAPI).

DISCUSSION

Despite the recent proliferation of surgical and anesthesiology-related LCAs, extant studies address a miniscule fraction of the numerous services, procedures, and products available today. Methodological heterogeneity, external validity, and a lack of background life cycle inventory data related to many essential surgical and anesthetic inputs are key limitations of the current evidence base. This review provides an indication of the spectrum of environmental impacts associated with surgical and anesthetic care at various scales. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8666.