BACKGROUND: The US health care sector has substantial financial and environmental footprints. As literature continues to study the differences between wide-awake hand surgery (WAHS) and the more traditional hand surgery with sedation & local anesthesia, we sought to explore the opportunities to enhance the sustainability of WAHS through analysis of the respective costs and waste generation of the 2 techniques. METHODS: We created a "minimal" custom pack of disposable surgical supplies expressly for small hand surgery procedures and then measured the waste from 178 small hand surgeries performed using either the "minimal pack" or the "standard pack," depending on physician pack choice. Patients were also asked to complete a postoperative survey on their experience. Data were analyzed using 1- and 2-way ANOVAs, 2-sample t tests, and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: As expected, WAHS with the minimal pack produced 0.3 kg (13%) less waste and cost $125 (55%) less in supplies per case than sedation & local with the standard pack. Pack size was found to be the driving factor in waste generation. Patients who underwent WAHS reported slightly greater pain and anxiety levels during their surgery, but also reported greater satisfaction with their anesthetic choice, which could be tied to the enthusiasm of the physician performing WAHS. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical waste and spending can be reduced by minimizing the materials brought into the operating room in disposable packs. WAHS, as a nascent technique, may provide an opportunity to drive sustainability by paring back what is considered necessary in these packs. Moreover, despite some initial anxiety, many patients report greater satisfaction with WAHS. All told, our study suggests a potentially broader role for WAHS, with its concomitant emphases on patient satisfaction and the efficient use of time and resources.
BACKGROUND: The US health care sector has substantial financial and environmental footprints. As literature continues to study the differences between wide-awake hand surgery (WAHS) and the more traditional hand surgery with sedation & local anesthesia, we sought to explore the opportunities to enhance the sustainability of WAHS through analysis of the respective costs and waste generation of the 2 techniques. METHODS: We created a "minimal" custom pack of disposable surgical supplies expressly for small hand surgery procedures and then measured the waste from 178 small hand surgeries performed using either the "minimal pack" or the "standard pack," depending on physician pack choice. Patients were also asked to complete a postoperative survey on their experience. Data were analyzed using 1- and 2-way ANOVAs, 2-sample t tests, and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: As expected, WAHS with the minimal pack produced 0.3 kg (13%) less waste and cost $125 (55%) less in supplies per case than sedation & local with the standard pack. Pack size was found to be the driving factor in waste generation. Patients who underwent WAHS reported slightly greater pain and anxiety levels during their surgery, but also reported greater satisfaction with their anesthetic choice, which could be tied to the enthusiasm of the physician performing WAHS. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical waste and spending can be reduced by minimizing the materials brought into the operating room in disposable packs. WAHS, as a nascent technique, may provide an opportunity to drive sustainability by paring back what is considered necessary in these packs. Moreover, despite some initial anxiety, many patients report greater satisfaction with WAHS. All told, our study suggests a potentially broader role for WAHS, with its concomitant emphases on patient satisfaction and the efficient use of time and resources.
Authors: Abhishek Chatterjee; James E McCarthy; Shirley A Montagne; Kenneth Leong; Carolyn L Kerrigan Journal: Ann Plast Surg Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 1.539
Authors: Nicole Campion; Cassandra L Thiel; Justin DeBlois; Noe C Woods; Amy E Landis; Melissa M Bilec Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2012-04-05 Impact factor: 7.963
Authors: Rengaraj Venkatesh; Suzanne W van Landingham; Ashish M Khodifad; Aravind Haripriya; Cassandra L Thiel; Pradeep Ramulu; Alan L Robin Journal: Curr Opin Ophthalmol Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.761
Authors: Arthur Couto Neves; Camila Costa Maia; Maria Esther de Castro E Silva; Gisele Vidal Vimieiro; Marcos Paulo Gomes Mol Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2022-07-23 Impact factor: 5.190