Maria-Alexandra Petre1, Stephan Malherbe2. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Montreal Children's Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. maria.petre@mcgill.ca. 2. Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & Therapeutics, British Columbia Children's Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This continuing professional development module aims to inform anesthesiologists about the magnitude of healthcare-related waste and its contribution to global warming, as well as providing general strategies to improve environmental sustainability in daily anesthesia practice in a Canadian context. PRINCIPAL CONSIDERATIONS: Global warming is considered to be the biggest global health threat of the 21st century. Healthcare is not only adversely impacted by but also a significant contributor to global warming and environmental degradation. Healthcare provision produces 4.6% of the total national greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, while healthcare waste has increased unabated in recent years, largely because of increased use of disposable medical supplies. Operating rooms are highly energy-intensive and produce up to 33% of total hospital waste. Increasingly, attention in healthcare is being focused on environmental sustainability by exploring evidence-based approaches to more sustainable delivery of healthcare. Key to environmental sustainability research is the life-cycle assessment methodology, which measures the cradle-to-grave impact of products on various environmental outcomes and empowers purchasing departments to make environmentally conscious decisions. By using the "reduce, reuse, recycle" hierarchy of waste reduction, several easily implementable evidence-based strategies are proposed to reduce the environmental footprint of everyday anesthesia practice. These recommendations focus on informed decisions on volatile anesthetic use, reduced drug waste, limited use of single-use devices, and meticulous waste segregation and recycling strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesiologists have a unique opportunity to be champions of environmental sustainability through evidence-based practices, while simultaneously reaping significant synergistic health, cost, and quality co-benefits.
PURPOSE: This continuing professional development module aims to inform anesthesiologists about the magnitude of healthcare-related waste and its contribution to global warming, as well as providing general strategies to improve environmental sustainability in daily anesthesia practice in a Canadian context. PRINCIPAL CONSIDERATIONS: Global warming is considered to be the biggest global health threat of the 21st century. Healthcare is not only adversely impacted by but also a significant contributor to global warming and environmental degradation. Healthcare provision produces 4.6% of the total national greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, while healthcare waste has increased unabated in recent years, largely because of increased use of disposable medical supplies. Operating rooms are highly energy-intensive and produce up to 33% of total hospital waste. Increasingly, attention in healthcare is being focused on environmental sustainability by exploring evidence-based approaches to more sustainable delivery of healthcare. Key to environmental sustainability research is the life-cycle assessment methodology, which measures the cradle-to-grave impact of products on various environmental outcomes and empowers purchasing departments to make environmentally conscious decisions. By using the "reduce, reuse, recycle" hierarchy of waste reduction, several easily implementable evidence-based strategies are proposed to reduce the environmental footprint of everyday anesthesia practice. These recommendations focus on informed decisions on volatile anesthetic use, reduced drug waste, limited use of single-use devices, and meticulous waste segregation and recycling strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesiologists have a unique opportunity to be champions of environmental sustainability through evidence-based practices, while simultaneously reaping significant synergistic health, cost, and quality co-benefits.
Authors: G Rebitzer; T Ekvall; R Frischknecht; D Hunkeler; G Norris; T Rydberg; W-P Schmidt; S Suh; B P Weidema; D W Pennington Journal: Environ Int Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Anthony Costello; Mustafa Abbas; Adriana Allen; Sarah Ball; Sarah Bell; Richard Bellamy; Sharon Friel; Nora Groce; Anne Johnson; Maria Kett; Maria Lee; Caren Levy; Mark Maslin; David McCoy; Bill McGuire; Hugh Montgomery; David Napier; Christina Pagel; Jinesh Patel; Jose Antonio Puppim de Oliveira; Nanneke Redclift; Hannah Rees; Daniel Rogger; Joanne Scott; Judith Stephenson; John Twigg; Jonathan Wolff; Craig Patterson Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-05-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Maria-Alexandra Petre; Lisa Bahrey; Mark Levine; Adriaan van Rensburg; Mark Crawford; Clyde Matava Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2018-12-13 Impact factor: 5.063
Authors: Cassandra L Thiel; Matthew Eckelman; Richard Guido; Matthew Huddleston; Amy E Landis; Jodi Sherman; Scott O Shrake; Noe Copley-Woods; Melissa M Bilec Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Rennie X Qin; Lotta Velin; Elizabeth F Yates; Omnia El Omrani; Elizabeth McLeod; Jemesa Tudravu; Lubna Samad; Alistair Woodward; Craig D McClain Journal: Lancet Reg Health West Pac Date: 2022-02-23