Reducing the carbon footprint of the operating theatre: a multicentre quality improvement report

Comparison of 3T MR arthrography and 3T MRI in intra-articular hip pathology: a cost-analysis

BACKGROUND

MR arthrography (MRA) has previously been the radiological gold standard for investigating labral and chondral lesions of the hip joint. In recent years, 3T MRI has demonstrated comparable accuracy, being adopted as the first-line imaging investigation in many institutions.

AIMS

We compare the associated increased cost and radiation dose of the fluoroscopic component of the MRA compared to MRI.

METHODS

In this retrospective review over 2 years, 120 patients (mean age 27.3 years ± 13.2, range 8-67) underwent 3T MRA or non-contrast 3T MRI. Three musculoskeletal radiologists reported the data independently. Primary objectives included cost-comparison between each and radiation dose of the fluoroscopic component of the MRA. Secondary objectives included comparing detection of pathology involving the acetabular labrum, femoral cartilage, and acetabular cartilage.

RESULTS

Then, 58 (48%) underwent 3T MRA and 62 (52%) patients underwent 3T MRI. The added cost of the fluoroscopic injection prior to MRA was €116.31/patient, equating to €7211.22 savings/year. MRA was associated with a small radiation dose of 0.003 mSv.

CONCLUSIONS

Transitioning from 3T MRA to 3T MRI in the investigation of intra-articular hip pathology increases cost savings and reduces radiation dose.

Greening Hand Surgery: Targeted Measures to Reduce Waste in Ambulatory Trigger Finger and Carpal Tunnel Decompression

BACKGROUND

Operating rooms (ORs) produce approximately 70% of hospital waste. Greening strategies in the OR aim to reduce the environmental impact of surgery while maintaining patient safety and outcomes. The aim of this study was to strategically reduce waste and cost associated with common ambulatory hand procedures by implementing a 3-stage "green case" plan over a 1-year period in a high-volume tertiary referral hand surgery division.

METHODS

A 3-stage greening initiative for hand surgery was designed and implemented in ambulatory open carpal tunnel release (CTR) and trigger finger release (TFR) cases, including: (1) introduction of minor field sterility; (2) implementation of a lean and green minor hand surgery pack and reduced instrument set; and (3) elimination of gown use by surgeons and OR staff. Surgical supply usage and costs were tracked during the study period and compared with control.

RESULTS

Each "green case" resulted in savings of $105 compared with the control cases from the preceding year, excluding cost savings associated with reduced waste processing. There was a 64% and 75% reduction in waste and costs after greening, respectively. This equates to a minimum institutional annual savings of $51 000 when used for CTR and TFR. There was no observed increase in surgical site infections or complications after the introduction of greening.

CONCLUSION

Greening initiatives can be successfully implemented by surgeons to reduce waste and costs. With targeted greening of CTR and TFR procedures, we significantly reduced waste and decreased costs while maintaining patient safety and outcomes.

[Recycling of Disposable Surgical Instruments - Is It Worth It?]

The German healthcare sector is responsible for 5.2% of the country's greenhouse gas emissions. One contributing factor is the enormous amount of waste generated daily in German hospitals, making them the fifth largest waste producer in Germany. Despite the potential for recycling, a significant portion of hospital waste is incinerated, as mandated by current regulations. This results in high levels of noxious CO2 emissions and the loss of valuable resources. The goal of this project was to demonstrate the feasibility of recycling complex, contaminated disposable surgical instruments.The study included frequently used disposable surgical instruments that could potentially be recycled as electronic waste. The instruments were wipe-disinfected and sterilised internally within the hospital. After sterilisation, the devices could be classified as electronic waste in consultation with the environmental authorities and then machine-recycled externally by a waste disposal company. Sorting machines shredded and separated the instruments into individual fractions of cables, plastics, different metals, and circuit boards, which were further processed into secondary raw materials.In the first six months (09/2022-03/2023), 239 kg of material were recycled instead of being incinerated. This resulted in a reduction of 545 kg CO2e. The metal content was estimated as 50% of the total weight; 30% were recyclable plastics, resulting in an 80% recycling rate. The ongoing recycling costs were 1.90 €/kg after deducting revenues. Thus, recycling in this model was approximately 3.9 times as expensive as incineration. A survey of the operating theatre personnel found high satisfaction with the recycling project and a minimal additional workload of less than five minutes.We demonstrated that recycling of contaminated disposable surgical instruments is possible in coordination with government authorities. This approach avoids waste incineration and leads to a reduction in CO2-equivalent emissions. However, the higher costs of recycling and the requirement for in-house decontamination pose limitations on the implementation of such projects. To address this, it is necessary for lawmakers to reconsider current regulations and involve manufacturers in recycling costs to fully exploit the enormous recycling potential.

The Cost of Operating: Analysis of Single-Use Instrument Costs for Craniotomies

Introduction All-cause craniotomies comprise a significant portion of neurosurgical practice as well as hospital costs. While some instruments are reusable with a fixed cost, price variability for similar single-use instruments exists. A better understanding of these cost variations within cranial procedures can better inform operating physicians to be cost-sensitive stewards. Objective In this study, we examine how single-use items contribute to the overall cost of cranial procedures.  Methods A de-identified institutional database containing records of all single-use items from craniotomies between July 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020, was subject to a longitudinal analysis by three independent parties (one senior surgeon, one resident, and one medical student). Four hundred and sixty-nine unique single-use items were identified and classified by function. Similar items were combined, and a range of costs was provided. Three sample cases with sum costs were reviewed for cost division and primary contributors. Results  The category with the highest median cost across all cases was non-specialty implants comprising dural onlays, mesh, aneurysm clips, and plates. The category with the lowest median cost was personal protective equipment. The items with the most cost variability were sterile surgical patties due to the variety of sizes and preset multipacks. The proportion of cost generators varies from craniotomy indication.  Conclusion While institution dependent, awareness of cost generators in cranial cases is important for economic stewardship. For single-use items, costs are highly variable and not insignificant. Surgeons and neurosurgical departments are responsible for allocating single-use items in a responsible and efficient manner.

Sustainable orthopaedic surgery: Initiatives to improve our environmental, social and economic impact

In response to appeals from the WHO and The Lancet, a collaborative statement from over 200 medical journals was published in September 2021, advising international governments to combat the "catastrophic harm to health" from climate change. Healthcare, specifically surgery, constitutes a major contributor to environmental harm that remains unaddressed. This article provides practical guidance that can be instituted at a departmental, hospital and national level to institute transformative, sustainable efforts into practice. We also aim to provoke healthcare leaders to discuss policy-making with respect to this issue and highlight the necessity for sustainability to become a core domain of quality improvement. The average orthopaedic service produces 60% more waste than any other surgical specialty. Fortunately, simple measures such as a comprehensive education programme can decrease waste disposal costs by 20-fold. Other simple and effective "green" measures include integrating carbon literacy into surgical training, prioritising regional anaesthesia and conducting recycling audits. Furthermore, industry must take accountability and be incentivised to limit the use of single-item packaging and single-use items. National policymakers should consider the benefits of reusable implants, reusable surgical drapes and refurbishing crutches as these are proven cost and climate-effective interventions. It is crucial to establish a local sustainability committee to maintain these interventions and to bridge the gap between clinicians, industry and policymakers.

The environmental impact of health care for musculoskeletal conditions: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Health care has significant environmental impact. We performed a scoping review to map what is known about the environmental impact of health care for musculoskeletal conditions.

METHODS

We included published papers of any design that measured or discussed environmental impact of health care or health support services for any musculoskeletal condition in terms of climate change or global warming (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions it produces). We searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception to 2 May 2022 using keywords for environmental health and musculoskeletal conditions, and performed keyword searches using Google and Google Scholar. Two independent reviewers screened studies. One author independently charted data, verified by a second author. A narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 12,302 publications screened and 73 identified from other searches, 122 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 49 were included (published 1994 to 2022). Of 24 original research studies, 11 measured environmental impact relating to climate change in orthopaedics (n = 10), and medical aids for the knee (n = 1), one measured energy expenditure of laminar versus turbulent airflow ventilation systems in operating rooms during simulated hip replacements and 12 measured waste associated with orthopaedic surgery but did not relate waste to greenhouse gas emissions or environmental effects. Twenty-one editorials described a need to reduce environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery (n = 9), physiotherapy (n = 9), podiatry (n = 2) or occupational therapy (n = 1). Four narrative reviews discussed sustainability relating to hand surgery (n = 2), orthopaedic surgery (n = 1) and orthopaedic implants (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

Despite an established link between health care and greenhouse gas emissions we found limited empirical data estimating the impact of musculoskeletal health care on the environment. These data are needed to determine whether actions to lower the carbon footprint of musculoskeletal health care should be a priority and to identify those aspects of care that should be prioritised.

Operating room waste management: A case study of primary hip operations at a leading national health service hospital in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

This research examines current waste management within an operating room at a large United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) hospital. The study measured the volume and type of waste produced for primary hip operations (PHOs) and estimated the total waste produced across the United Kingdom by the procedure.

METHODS

Three PHOs were audited to measure and compare the waste volumes generated.

RESULTS

The average volume of waste per surgical procedure was 10.9 kg, consisting of clinical (84.4%), recyclable (12.8%) and bio-bin (2.8%) waste. This research also found that single-use devices contribute significantly to operating room waste. In addition, it was estimated that there is a missed opportunity to reduce clinical waste volume in each procedure, where approximately 15% of clinical waste disposal consisted of visibly clean recyclable waste material, including cardboard and plastics.

CONCLUSIONS

It was estimated that in the NHS approximately 1043 tonnes of waste is produced annually by PHOs alone. A significant volume of this waste could be prevented through improved recycling and reduced use of single-use devices.

[Climate change: how surgery contributes to global warming]

BACKGROUND

Surgery as an important part of the healthcare sector contributes to environmental pollution and therefore to the climate crisis. The aim of this review is to create an overview of the current data situation and possibilities for improvement.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE using the following five terms: "carbon footprint and surgery", "climate change and surgery", "waste and surgery" and "greening the operating room" focusing on energy, waste, water and anesthesia.

RESULTS

The greatest part of emissions in surgery is generated by the use of energy. The operating rooms (OR) need 3-6 times more energy than the other hospital rooms. Of the total hospital waste 20-30% is produced during operations, which is particularly due to the increasing use of disposable articles and 50-90% of waste classified as hazardous is incorrectly sorted. The disposal of this waste is not only more environmentally harmful but also much more expensive. The processing of surgical items by autoclaving consumes large amounts of water. Modern sterilization methods, for example using plasma could be future alternatives. Up to 20% of volatile nonmetabolized anesthetic agents are vented into the stratosphere and destroy the ozone layer. Intravenous anesthetic drugs should be used whenever possible instead. The choice of operating method can also contribute to the environmental impact of an operation.

CONCLUSION

The surgical disciplines are a relevant producer of environmental pollutants. Through diverse interdisciplinary approaches surgery can also contribute to protecting the environment.

Ophthalmology Going Greener: A Narrative Review

The combined effects of fossil fuel combustion, mass agricultural production and deforestation, industrialisation and the evolution of modern transport systems have resulted in high levels of carbon emissions and accumulation of greenhouse gases, causing profound climate change and ozone layer depletion. The consequential depletion of Earth's natural ecosystems and biodiversity is not only a devastating loss but a threat to human health. Sustainability-the ability to continue activities indefinitely-underpins the principal solutions to these problems. Globally, the healthcare sector is a major contributor to carbon emissions, with waste production and transport systems being amongst the highest contributing factors. The aim of this review is to explore modalities by which the healthcare sector, particularly ophthalmology, can reduce carbon emissions, related costs and overall environmental impact, whilst maintaining a high standard of patient care.

Medical conferences in the era of environmental conscientiousness and a global health crisis: The carbon footprint of presenter flights to pre-COVID pediatric urology conferences and a consideration of future options

INTRODUCTION

Medical conferences are integral to academic medicine, with academic posters being a well-established medium for presenting research. However, conferences carry an ecological footprint due to greenhouse gas emissions. Furthermore, traditional conference formats have recently not been possible due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Herein we examine the carbon footprint associated with travel by presenting delegates to the Fall SPU conferences from 2013 to 2019, and the 2015 ESPU conference.

METHODS

Online programs for the targeted SPU Fall meetings and the 2015 ESPU Annual Meeting were retrospectively reviewed. Variables collected included meeting location and presenter home base. Distance traveled by the presenter, and likely CO₂e of this return trip were estimated using online calculators. Analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis-H test with pairwise comparisons to detect differences in round trip distances and CO₂e between meeting locations.

RESULTS

Six Fall SPU conferences and one ESPU conference were reviewed. The majority of presenters were from the region (North America and Europe, respectively), for both SPU and ESPU. The median round trip distance was 2596.34 miles (IQR 1420.96-4438.30), and the median CO₂e 0.61 metric tons (IQR 0.36-1.02). We found that the distances traveled to conferences in the Western USA and Europe were slightly further than those to conferences in Central Canada and the Southern US. The difference in CO₂e between these locations did not achieve statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Presenter travel to and from pediatric urological conferences generates an important carbon footprint and may not be possible in the medium-term future due to a global pandemic. We should explore strategies to allow meetings and knowledge exchange to continue whilst reducing the need for travel and the ecological burden of conferences.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III: Most comparative level of evidence.

Sustainability Initiatives in the Operating Room

BACKGROUND

Operating rooms (ORs) contribute up to 30% of a hospital's waste, are very resource-intensive, and thus provide an opportunity for improvement.

METHODS

A narrative review was conducted, searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ProQuest databases. The study included 78 of the 108 published articles.

RESULTS

The researchers identified and categorized articles according to the following major themes: Committee and Leadership; Waste Reduction; Segregating OR waste; Minimizing unnecessary devices and packaging; Reducing energy consumption; Choosing anesthetic gases; Education; Reducing water consumption; Different surgical venues; Donating medical supplies. Formation of an OR committee or a hospital Green Team dedicated to environmentally sustainable initiatives can significantly improve health care's impact on the environment while saving money. Changes in supply chain with preferences for reusable devices, effective recycling, repurposing instruments, and donating items can all be effective means of diverting waste away from landfills. Reducing unnecessary packaging and instruments would eliminate excess in the waste stream. Curtailing energy and water usage results in cost and environmental savings. Surgical venue (inpatient vs. outpatient surgical center) can also contribute to waste. Transitioning away from certain inhaled anesthetics can minimize greenhouse gas impact. Education to all levels in the health care system is important to drive change and maintain change.

CONCLUSION

Optimizing efficiency and decreasing waste generation can have a positive impact on the environment and can be accompanied by cost reduction. Because the field of sustainability in health care is young but burgeoning, increased research is needed to support evidence-based approaches.

Design Opportunities to Reduce Waste in Operating Rooms

While taking care of the population’s health, hospitals generate mountains of waste, which in turn causes a hazard to the environment of the population. The operating room is responsible for a disproportionately big amount of hospital waste. This research aims to investigate waste creation in the operating room in order to identify design opportunities to support waste reduction according to the circular economy. Eight observations and five expert interviews were conducted in a large sized hospital. The hospital’s waste infrastructure, management, and sterilization department were mapped out. Findings are that washable towels and operation instruments are reused; paper, cardboard, and specific fabric are being recycled; and (non-)hazardous medical waste is being incinerated. Observation results and literature findings are largely comparable, stating that covering sheets of the operation bed, sterile clothing, sterile packaging, and department-specific products are as well the most used and discarded. The research also identified two waste hotspots: the logistical packaging (tertiary, secondary, and primary) of products and incorrect sorting between hazardous and non-hazardous medical waste. Design opportunities include optimization of recycling and increased use of reusables. Reuse is the preferred method, more specifically by exploring the possibilities of reuse of textiles, consumables, and packaging.

Environmental sustainability in neurointerventional procedures: a waste audit

Background

Operating rooms contribute between 20% to 70% of hospital waste. This study aimed to evaluate the waste burden of neurointerventional procedures performed in a radiology department, identify areas for waste reduction, and motivate new greening initiatives.

Methods

We performed a waste audit of 17 neurointerventional procedures at a tertiary-referral center over a 3-month period. Waste was categorized into five streams: general waste, clinical waste, recyclable plastic, recyclable paper, and sharps. Our radiology department started recycling soft plastics from 13 December 2019. Hence, an additional recyclable soft plastic waste stream was added from this time point. The weight of each waste stream was measured using a digital weighing scale.

Results

We measured the waste from seven cerebral digital subtraction angiograms (DSA), six mechanical thrombectomies (MT), two aneurysm-coiling procedures, one coiling with tumour embolization, and one dural arteriovenous fistula embolization procedure. In total, the 17 procedures generated 135.3 kg of waste: 85.5 kg (63.2%) clinical waste, 28.0 kg (20.7%) general waste, 14.7 kg (10.9%) recyclable paper, 3.5 kg (2.6%) recyclable plastic, 2.2 kg (1.6%) recyclable soft plastic, and 1.4 kg (1.0%) of sharps. An average of 8 kg of waste was generated per case. Coiling cases produced the greatest waste burden (13.1 kg), followed by embolization (10.3 kg), MT (8.8 kg), and DSA procedures (5.1 kg).

Conclusion

Neurointerventional procedures generate a substantial amount of waste, an average of 8 kg per case. Targeted initiatives such as engaging with suppliers to revise procedure packs and reduce packaging, digitizing paper instructions, opening devices only when necessary, implementing additional recycling programs, and appropriate waste segregation have the potential to reduce the environmental impact of our specialty.

Waste and recycling among orthopedic subspecialties

Background

It is estimated that one-quarter to half of all hospital waste is produced in the operating room. Recycling of surgical waste in the perioperative setting is uncommon, even though there are many recyclable materials. The objective of this study was to determine the amount of waste produced in the preoperative and operative periods for several orthopedic subspecialties and to assess how much of this waste was recycled.

Methods

Surgical cases at 1 adult and 1 pediatric tertiary care hospital in Calgary, Alberta, were prospectively chosen from 6 orthopedic subspecialties over a 1-month period. Waste was collected, weighed and divided into recyclable and nonrecyclable categories in the preoperative period and into recyclable, nonrecyclable, linen and biological categories in the intraoperative period. Waste bags were weighed using a portable hand-held scale. The primary outcome was the amount of recyclable waste produced per case. Secondary outcomes included the amount of nonrecyclable, biological and total waste produced. An analysis of variance was performed to test for statistically significant differences among subspecialties.

Results

This study included 55 procedures. A total of 341.0 kg of waste was collected, with a mean mass of 6.2 kg per case. Arthroplasty produced a greater amount of recyclable waste per case in the preoperative (2017.1 g) and intraoperative (938.6 g) periods as well as total recyclable waste per case, resulting in a greater ratio of waste recycling per case then nearly all other subspecialties in the preoperative (86%) and intraoperative (14%) periods. Arthroplasty similarly produced a greater amount of nonrecyclable waste per case (5823.6 g) than the other subspecialties, most of which was produced during the intraoperative period (5512.9 g). Overall an average of 27% of waste was recycled per case.

Conclusion

Among orthopedic subspecialties, arthroplasty is one of the largest waste producers and it has the highest potential for recycling of materials. Effective recycling programs in the operating room can reduce our ecological footprint by diverting waste from landfills, as our study revealed that nearly three-quarters of this waste is recyclable.

Cold Technique in Adult Tonsillectomy Reduces Waste and Cost

OBJECTIVES

To quantify differences in waste and cost of disposable equipment between different tonsillectomy techniques.

METHODS

Prospective study of waste attributable to disposable waste produced by tonsillectomy surgery. Disposable equipment required for tonsillectomy using cold, monopolar electrocautery (ME), and coblation techniques was measured; and differences in mass, volume, and cost of equipment between the 3 techniques were quantified.

RESULTS

Cold technique was found to produce the least waste and have the lowest cost attributable to disposable surgical equipment. Projected single-case savings in mass and volume of waste resulting from using cold technique compared to ME were 1.272 kg and 1.013 L, respectively, and 1.043 kg and 1.723 L compared to coblation. Projected single-case savings in cost of disposable equipment for cold technique compared to ME were US$9.35 and US$185.05 compared to coblation.

DISCUSSION

Using cold technique for adult tonsillectomy reduces waste and cost of disposable equipment compared to ME and coblation. Implications for Practice: Surgeons desiring to reduce cost and waste associated with tonsillectomy surgery may consider transitioning to cold technique.

Greening the Operating Room: Results of a Scalable Initiative to Reduce Waste and Recover Supply Costs

Operating rooms generate 42% of a hospital's revenue and 30% of hospital waste. Supply costs are 56% of a total operating room (OR) budget. US academic medical centers use 2 million pounds ($15 million) of recoverable medical supplies annually. Forming a multidisciplinary leadership team, we analyzed sources of waste focusing on our Department of Neurosurgery. We developed an 8-wk pilot project to recycle "blue wrap," the number 5 plastic polypropylene material that is ubiquitously used in ORs across the country to wrap instrument pans and implant trays for sterilization. Blue wrap can be baled and sold to recyclers where the material is pelletized and transformed into plastic products. During the 39 d of the pilot, we collected 1247 pounds of blue wrap (32 lbs collected daily). The cost of the pilot was $14 987 that includes a new baler ($11 200) and 5 transport carts ($3697). The revenue received from baled blue wrap was 8 cents per pound. Cost avoidance yielded $31 680.00 in savings. Implementation of this pilot across our main hospital would yield $5000 in revenue annually and $174 240 in cost avoidance. This project can be replicated at other centers and not only reduces the environmental footprint, but also helps generate additional revenue by recycling a necessary packing material that would otherwise require payment for disposal.

Operating room greening initiatives - the old, the new, and the way forward: A narrative review

Healthcare waste is a rampant issue in Australian hospitals. The operating room (OR) contributes disproportionately to total hospital waste. There has been considerable research in the literature concentrating on strategies to improve OR and hospital waste accumulation, in an attempt to provide guidance and direction on how to reduce the healthcare ecological footprint. We reviewed the literature for leading greening initiatives currently utilised in the OR in Australia and internationally. This narrative literature review focuses on the trend of OR greening initiatives over the last 25 years, comparing different innovative approaches, the successes and setbacks, and the financial implications of initiatives. A variety of measures that hospital management, surgeons, anaesthetists, nurses and other healthcare personnel can take to reduce the ecological footprint of their healthcare facility are outlined. Greening initiatives include reducing, recycling, reusing, rethinking and researching, as well as novel technology and smarter architectural design. We also evaluated the barriers to improving waste management, which include lack of leadership, misconceptions among staff, and an overall resistance to change. In conclusion, in a world where greenhouse gas emissions cause unprecedented climate change and landfill space is finite, it is incumbent upon hospitals to help reduce the environmental impact of their facility. Reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions would moderate the incidence of human disease, save money for the healthcare system and society as a whole, and contribute to a safer and healthier world we all would like to live in.

Pragmatic recycling of paper and cardboard in the operating theatre: an audit

Despite recent legislation introduced in Scotland and motivated recycling at home, very little recycling exists within theatre environments. This study audited the introduction of recycling of paper and cardboard. All waste within a single operating theatre was collected by a dedicated team for 20 surgical cases. The collection of clean paper and cardboard packaging was limited to the theatre preparation room (TPR) and anaesthetic room (AR). No waste segregation was attempted within the operating theatre itself. The results showed that the AR produced a mean weight of 1.3kg of waste per patient (50% paper and cardboard), and the TPR produced 3.05kg per patient (33% general waste; 44% paper; 23% cardboard). Recycling saved a mean of £0.51 per case. The 54kg of recycled bags produced during the study saved 25kg CO2 emissions. This study describes a pragmatic method to recycle paper and cardboard within the TPR and AR. There are significant potential financial and environmental savings to be achieved.

Operating room waste: disposable supply utilization in neurosurgical procedures

OBJECTIVE

Disposable supplies constitute a large portion of operating room (OR) costs and are often left over at the end of a surgical case. Despite financial and environmental implications of such waste, there has been little evaluation of OR supply utilization. The goal of this study was to quantify the utilization of disposable supplies and the costs associated with opened but unused items (i.e., “waste”) in neurosurgical procedures.

METHODS

Every disposable supply that was unused at the end of surgery was quantified through direct observation of 58 neurosurgical cases at the University of California, San Francisco, in August 2015. Item costs (in US dollars) were determined from the authors' supply catalog, and statistical analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Across 58 procedures (36 cranial, 22 spinal), the average cost of unused supplies was $653 (range $89-$3640, median $448, interquartile range $230–$810), or 13.1% of total surgical supply cost. Univariate analyses revealed that case type (cranial versus spinal), case category (vascular, tumor, functional, instrumented, and noninstrumented spine), and surgeon were important predictors of the percentage of unused surgical supply cost. Case length and years of surgical training did not affect the percentage of unused supply cost. Accounting for the different case distribution in the 58 selected cases, the authors estimate approximately $968 of OR waste per case, $242,968 per month, and $2.9 million per year, for their neurosurgical department.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a large variation and significant magnitude of OR waste in neurosurgical procedures. At the authors' institution, they recommend price transparency, education about OR waste to surgeons and nurses, preference card reviews, and clarification of supplies that should be opened versus available as needed to reduce waste.

Reducing the Preoperative Ecological Footprint in Otolaryngology

Objectives

To (1) evaluate the potential for recycling uncontaminated preoperative waste and (2) identify recycling differences within otolaryngology–head and neck surgery subspecialties.

Study Design

Prospective study.

Setting

Three university-affiliated tertiary level hospitals.

Subjects

Otolaryngology–head and neck surgery operative procedures.

Methods

A total of 97 operative procedures were evaluated. Preoperative waste products were sorted into recyclable and nonrecyclable materials; intraoperative waste was weighed for volume but not sorted. The preoperative period was defined as the opening of the surgical supply cart for operating room preparation until procedure initiation. Mass and volume of each type of waste were recorded upon the conclusion of the case.

Results

Approximately 23.1% of total operative waste mass (36.7% by volume) was derived from the preoperative set-up, of which 89.7% was recyclable. Pediatric procedures produced the least recyclable material per operation as a proportion of total waste, which was statistically different than the 2 highest recyclable subspecialties, general and rhinology ( P = .006); the remaining subspecialties did not statistically differ in proportion of recyclable material produced.

Conclusion

This study identified a source of clean recyclable materials that could eliminate 21% of operating room waste mass.