Green endoscopy: using quality improvement to develop sustainable practice

Ecogastroenterology: cultivating sustainable clinical excellence in an environmentally conscious landscape

Gastrointestinal practices, especially endoscopy, have a substantial environmental impact, marked by notable greenhouse gas emissions and waste generation. As the world struggles with climate change, there emerges a pressing need to re-evaluate and reform the environmental footprint within gastrointestinal medicine. The challenge lies in finding a harmonious balance between ensuring clinical effectiveness and upholding environmental responsibility. This task involves recognising that the most significant reduction in the carbon footprint of endoscopy is achieved by avoiding unnecessary procedures; addressing the use of single-use endoscopes and accessories; and extending beyond the procedural suites to include clinics, virtual care, and conferences, among other aspects of gastrointestinal practice. The emerging digital realm in health care is crucial, given the potential environmental advantages of virtual gastroenterological care. Through an in-depth analysis, this review presents a path towards sustainable gastrointestinal practices, emphasising integrated strategies that prioritise both patient care and environmental stewardship.

The Environmental Impact of Gastrointestinal Procedures: A Prospective Study of Waste Generation, Energy Consumption, and Auditing in an Endoscopy Unit

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy procedures are critical for screening, diagnosis, and treatment of a variety of GI disorders. However, like the procedures in other medical disciplines, they are a source of environmental waste generation and energy consumption.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on total waste generation, energy consumption, and the role of intraprocedural inventory audit of a single tertiary care academic endoscopy unit over a 2-month period (May-June 2022). Detailed data on items used were collected, including procedure type (esophagogastroduodenoscopy or colonoscopy), accessories, intravenous tubing, biopsy jars, linen, and personal protective equipment use. Data on endoscope reprocessing-related waste generation and energy use in the endoscopy unit (equipment, lights, and computers) were also collected. We used an endoscopy staff-guided auditing and review of the items used during procedures to determine potentially recyclable items going to landfill waste. The waste generated was stratified into biohazardous, nonbiohazardous, or potentially recyclable items.

RESULTS

A total of 450 consecutive procedures were analyzed for total waste management (generation and reprocessing) and energy consumption. The total waste generated during the study period was 1398.6 kg (61.6% directly going to landfill, 33.3% biohazard waste, and 5.1% sharps), averaging 3.03 kg/procedure. The average waste directly going to landfill was 219 kg per 100 procedures. The estimated total annual waste generation approximated the size of 2 football fields (1-foot-high layered waste). Endoscope reprocessing generated 194 gallons of liquid waste per day, averaging 13.85 gallons per procedure. Total energy consumption in the endoscopy unit was 277.1 kW·h energy per day; for every 100 procedures, amounting to 1200 miles of distance traveled by an average fuel efficiency car. The estimated carbon footprint for every 100 GI procedures was 1501 kg carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent (= 1680 lbs of coal burned), which would require 1.8 acres of forests to sequester. The recyclable waste audit and review demonstrated that 20% of total waste consisted of potentially recyclable items (8.6 kg/d) that could be avoided by appropriate waste segregation of these items.

CONCLUSIONS

On average, every 100 GI endoscopy procedures (esophagogastroduodenoscopy/colonoscopy) are associated with 303 kg of solid waste and 1385 gallons of liquid waste generation, and 1980 kW·h energy consumption. Potentially recyclable materials account for 20% of the total waste. These data could serve as an actionable model for health systems to reduce total waste generation and decrease landfill waste and water waste toward environmentally sustainable endoscopy units.

Challenges of developing a green gastroenterology evidence base and how trainee research networks can fill the gaps

Trainee research networks are a collaborative effort to enable high-quality multicentre audits or research that is more widely accessible to trainees. Such networks lead, design and deliver research at a far higher scale than could be achieved locally and are carried out solely by trainees. There is an increasing focus on delivering research that is not only environmentally sustainable but also focuses on areas that can reduce the carbon footprint of service provision in gastroenterology and hepatology. In this manuscript, we performed a scoping review to understand the current evidence base of the impact of gastroenterology and hepatology services on the environment as well as exploring any association between pollution and climate change with gastrointestinal and liver disease. We further discuss the barriers that researchers face in delivering environmentally sustainable research, the limitation in clinical guidelines related to practicing environmentally sustainable gastroenterology and hepatology and how the trainee research networks are ideally placed to initiate change by developing, disseminating and implementing best practice in ‘green Gastroenterology’.

Production and possible reduction of greenhouse gases produced during GI endoscopy activity: a systematic review of available literature

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Greenhouse gases (GHGs) that trap heat in the atmosphere are composed of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases (synthetic hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and nitrogen trifluoride). In the USA, the health sector accounts for 8.5% of total GHG emissions. The primary objective of this systematic review was to critically analyse the carbon emissions data from GI endoscopic activity.

DESIGN

The GI endoscopy carbon cycle was evaluated at preprocedural, intraprocedural and postprocedural levels. We performed a systematic literature search of articles published on these issues until 30 June 2022 and discussed these available data on endoscopy unit GHG carbon cycle, barriers to reduce GHG emissions and potential solutions. The inclusion criteria were any full-text articles (observational, clinical trials, brief communications, case series and editorials) reporting waste generation from GI endoscopy. Abstracts, news articles and conference proceedings were excluded.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 393 records in PubMed, 1708 in Embase and 24 in Google Scholar. After application of inclusion and exclusion factors, we focused on 9 fulllength articles in detail, only 3 of them were cross-sectional studies (all from the USA), the others reviews or position statements. Therefore, the quality of the studies could not be assessed due to heterogeneity in definitions and amount of emissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognition of carbon emissions generated by GI endoscopy activity is critical. Although multiple limitations exists for quantification of these emission, there is an urgent need for collecting proper data as well as examining novel methods for reduction of these emissions for a sustainable endoscopic practices in the future.

Green endoscopy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), Joint Accreditation Group (JAG) and Centre for Sustainable Health (CSH) joint consensus on practical measures for environmental sustainability in endoscopy

GI endoscopy is highly resource-intensive with a significant contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and waste generation. Sustainable endoscopy in the context of climate change is now the focus of mainstream discussions between endoscopy providers, units and professional societies. In addition to broader global challenges, there are some specific measures relevant to endoscopy units and their practices, which could significantly reduce environmental impact. Awareness of these issues and guidance on practical interventions to mitigate the carbon footprint of GI endoscopy are lacking. In this consensus, we discuss practical measures to reduce the impact of endoscopy on the environment applicable to endoscopy units and practitioners. Adoption of these measures will facilitate and promote new practices and the evolution of a more sustainable specialty.

Green endoscopy: practical implementation

There is a necessity for endoscopy services as a speciality to lead the way in creating more sustainable departments. It is important we seek to explore and implement practical measures to ensure endoscopy services are working to meet our sustainability goals. The following article explores the practical implementation of measures which can be taken to make endoscopy greener.

Greener gastroenterology and hepatology: the British Society of Gastroenterology Strategy for Climate Change and Sustainability

There is a global climate emergency, and also a global health concern related to climate change. The British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) acknowledges these issues, and supports the concerns of its members to address them. Climate change has adverse effects on gastroenterological and liver disease, and on healthcare systems. The healthcare industry, itself, is also a major contributor to greenhouse gases. BSG has developed a strategy on Climate Change and Sustainability, which encompasses all of the activities of the society, and its members: personal, professional, organisational, political, international and research.

Unlocking the benefits of the Baveno VI guidance when screening for varices: an audit of clinical practice across London

Background

The Baveno VI consensus identifies patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD) who can safely avoid screening endoscopy. However, concordance in clinical practice with this guidance is unknown. We audited clinical practice and the provision of transient elastography (TE) aiming to identify potential cost savings and benefits.

Methods

Retrospective data collection from 12 sites across London over 6 months by reviewing oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) reports, platelet count and TE results as well as information on site-specific provision of TE.

Results

Three-hundred and fifty-one screening procedures were identified; 177 (50.43%) had a TE test performed within the preceding 12 months; 142 (80.23%) patients with a recent TE test did not meet criteria for screening OGD. TE provision varied widely between sites.

Conclusion

Improving concordance with the Baveno criteria through improved provision of TE would have benefits for patients, healthcare systems and the environment and would help to address the challenges of moving on from the COVID-19 pandemic.