Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author National Institute for Health and Care Research Global Health Research Unit on Global Surgery
dc.date.accessioned 2023-07-11T08:32:23Z
dc.date.available 2023-07-11T08:32:23Z
dc.date.issued 2023-04-20
dc.identifier.citation National Institute for Health and Care Research Global Health Research Unit on Global Surgery. Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries. Br J Surg. 2023 Jun 12;110(7):804-817. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znad092. PMID: 37079880. Format: en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://ir.lib.ruh.ac.lk/xmlui/handle/iruor/13587
dc.description.abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Oxford University Press en_US
dc.subject Trauma General en_US
dc.subject Surgery Acute en_US
dc.subject Care Surgery en_US
dc.title Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account