Quantification of the Cost and Potential Environmental Effects of Unused Pharmaceutical Products in Cataract Surgery

Cataract surgery in children using intracameral mydriatic

PURPOSE

To study the pupil dynamics with premixed intracameral anesthetic mydriatic combination of phenylephrine (0.31%), tropicamide (0.02%), and lidocaine (1%) in pediatric cataract surgery.

METHODS

Consecutive children aged ≤12 years planned for cataract surgery were recruited. A commercially available premixed combination of phenylephrine (0.31%), tropicamide (0.02%), and lidocaine (1%) was injected at the beginning of surgery without any topical/infusion drugs for mydriasis. Pupil sizes at various points of surgery were studied.

RESULTS

We recruited 75 patients with a mean age of 24.3 ± 33.4 months (range: 1 month-11 years). Adequate mydriasis with a single injection was achieved in 93.5% (n = 73 eyes of 70 patients) without additional pharmacotherapy or intervention. The mean pupillary diameter increased from 1.8 ± 0.79 to 6.1 ± 1.4 mm after injection (mean change of 4.2 ± 1.25 mm from baseline). The mean variability in pupillary diameter was 0.73 ± 1.3 mm. In five eyes, good dilatation was not possible even after repeat injection.

CONCLUSION

Fixed-dose premixed intracameral injection is effective in pupil dilatation. It alleviates the need for any topical dilators or additional intraoperative supplementation for pediatric cataract surgery.

The role of the health sector in tackling climate change: A narrative review

Climate change is one of the largest threats to population health and has already affected the ecosystem, food production, and health and wellbeing of populations all over the world. The healthcare sector is responsible for around 5 % of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and can play a key role in reducing global warming. This narrative review summarized the information on the role of healthcare systems in addressing climate change and strategies for reducing its negative impact to illustrate different types of actions that can support the ecological transformation of healthcare systems to help reaching sustainable development goals. A wide range of green interventions are shown to be effective to reduce the carbon footprint of healthcare and can have a meaningful impact if implemented systematically. However, these would not suffice unless accompanied by systemic mitigation strategies altering how healthcare is provided and consumed. Sustainable healthcare strategies such as reducing waste and low-value care will have direct benefits for the environment while improving economic and health outcomes. The healthcare sector has a unique opportunity to leverage its position and resources to provide a comprehensive strategy for fighting climate change and improving population health and the environment on which it depends.

Intravitreal Injections: Improving Sustainability by Reducing Clinical Waste

BACKGROUND

Intravitreal injections are one of the most commonly performed ophthalmic procedures. It is estimated that over 1 million intravitreal injections are performed in Germany annually. The aim of this study was to quantify the waste and carbon footprint associated with single-use injection sets, and to establish a waste reduction strategy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The clinical waste and associated carbon footprint from standard disposable injection sets used by tertiary referral centres in Germany (n = 6) and the United Kingdom (n = 2) were assessed. The safety of performing intravitreal injections with a minimalistic material-sparing approach was evaluated.

RESULTS

The average weight of an injection set (and hence the waste generated from each injection) was 165 g. On average, each injection set comprised 145 g (88%) of plastic, 2.1 g (1.3%) of metal, 4.3 g (2.6%) of paper, and 12.9 g (7.8%) of gauze/swabs. The production of such injection sets was extrapolated to a CO2 equivalent of 752.6 tonnes (t), and the incineration of the resulting waste to a CO2 equivalent of 301.7 t. For 1 million injections, this equates to 145.2 t of plastic, 2.1 t of metal, 4.3 t of paper, and 12.9 t of gauze/swabs. A material-sparing approach can reduce injection set-associated waste by 99% without necessarily compromising patient safety.

CONCLUSION

A resource-saving approach to intravitreal injections can minimise the generation of clinical waste and its associated carbon footprint, thereby supporting sustainability.

Achieving net-zero in the dry eye disease care pathway

Climate change is a threat to human health and wellbeing across the world. In recent years, there has been a surge in awareness of this crisis, leading to many countries and organisations setting "net-zero" targets. This entails minimising carbon emissions and neutralising remaining emissions by removing carbon from the atmosphere. At the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27), commitments to transition away from fossil fuels and augment climate targets were underwhelming. It is therefore imperative for public and private sector organisations to demonstrate successful implementation of net-zero and set a precedent for the global political consensus. As a top 10 world employer, the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) has pledged to reach net-zero by 2045. The NHS has already taken positive steps forward, but its scale and complexity as a health system means stakeholders in each of its services must highlight the specifications for further progress. Dry eye disease is a chronic illness with an estimated global prevalence of 29.5% and an environmentally damaging care pathway. Moreover, environmental damage is a known aggravator of dry eye disease. Worldwide management of this illness generates copious amounts of non-recyclable waste, utilises inefficient supply chains and involves recurrent follow-up appointments and prescriptions. By mapping the dry eye disease care pathway to environmental impact, in this review we will highlight seven key areas in which reduced emissions and pollution could be targeted. Examining these approaches for improved environmental sustainability is critical in driving the transformation needed to preserve our health and wellbeing.

Systematic review of carbon footprint of surgical procedures

The ecological sustainability of the operating room (OR) is a matter of recent interest. The present systematic review aimed to review the current literature assessing the carbon footprint of surgical procedures in different surgical fields. Following to the PRISMA statement checklist, three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) were searched by independent reviewers, who screened records on title and abstract first, and then on the full text. Risk of bias was evaluated using the MINORS system. Over the 878 articles initially identified, 36 original studies were included. They considered ophthalmologic surgical procedures (30.5%), general/digestive surgery (19.4%), gynecologic procedures (13.9%), orthopedic procedures (8.3%), neurosurgery (5.5%), otolaryngology/head and neck surgery (5.5%), plastic/dermatological surgery (5.5%), and cardiac surgery (2.8%). Despite a great methodological heterogeneity, data showed that a single surgical procedure emits 4-814 kgCO2e, with anesthetic gases and energy consumption representing the largest sources of greenhouse gas emission. Minimally invasive surgical techniques may require more resources than conventional open surgery, particularly for packaging and plastics, energy use, and waste production. Each OR has the potential to produce from 0.2 to 4kg of waste per case with substantial differences depending on the type of intervention, hospital setting, and geographic area. Overall, the selected studies were found to be of moderate quality. Based on a qualitative synthesis of the available literature, the OR can be targeted by programs and protocols implemented to reduce the carbon footprint and improve the waste stream of the OR.

Tracing the barriers to decarbonising ophthalmology: A review

As climate change demands increasingly urgent mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, the health sector needs to do its part to decarbonise. Ophthalmologists share concerns about climate change and seek opportunities to reduce their environmental impact. When measuring the footprint of ophthalmology, major contributions are from patient travel to clinics, and from the large amounts of single-use disposable materials that are consumed during surgeries and sterile procedures. Ophthalmic services in India have already demonstrated systems that consume far fewer of these products through efficient throughput of patients and the safe reuse of many items, while maintaining equivalent safety and quality outcomes. Choosing these low-cost low-emission options would seem obvious, but many ophthalmologists experience barriers that prevent them operating as Indian surgeons do. Understanding these barriers to change is a crucial step in the decarbonisation of ophthalmology and the health sector more broadly.

Sustainable health care: a real-world appraisal of a modern imaging department

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

There is universal interest in increasing sustainability in health care, including in imaging. We studied and characterized energy consumption in a representative imaging department in Denmark to identify and quantify the effect of specific optimizations.

METHODS

Protocols and energy parameters for the three main scanner modalities along with supportive systems and workflows were monitored and scrutinized. Potential savings were measured and/or calculated.

RESULTS

Only few optimizations were identified at the protocol level. However, examination of usage patterns and cooling systems revealed numerous potential optimizations which fell into three categories. 1) Optimizations requiring minimal changes in installations or workflows, for example, reduction of bed-position time, 2) optimizations requiring altered work flows such as strict adherence to timed shut-down procedures and 3) optimizations requiring retro-fitting equipment, typically at considerable monetary expense, for example fitting variable flow control on pumps. The single biggest identified optimization was raising the temperature of the circulating cooling water.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the complexity of increasing sustainability in health care, specifically in imaging. We identified multiple potential optimizations but also technical, monetary and organizational barriers preventing immediate implementation.

What a Waste! The Impact of Unused Surgical Supplies in Hand Surgery and How We Can Improve

BACKGROUND

The US health care system is the second largest contributor of trash. Approximately 20% to 70% of waste is produced by operating rooms, and very few of this waste is recycled. The purpose of this study is to quantify the opened but unused disposable supplies and generate strategies to reduce disposable waste.

METHODS

A single-center prospective study to evaluate the cost of opened but unused single-use operating room supplies was completed by counting the number of wasted disposable products at the end of hand surgery cases. We used χ2 test, t test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and simple linear regression to assess the associations between patient and case variables and the total cost of wasted items. Environmentally Extended Input Output Life Cycle Assessment methods were used to convert the dollar spent to kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e), a measure of greenhouse gas emissions.

RESULTS

Surgical and dressing items that were disposed of and not used during each case were recorded. We included 85 consecutive cases in the analysis from a single surgeon's practice. Higher cost from wasted items was associated with shorter operative time (P = .010). On average, 11.5 items were wasted per case (SD: 3.6 items), with a total of 981 items wasted over the 85 cases in the study period. Surgical sponges and blades were 2 of the most unused items. Wasted items amounted to a total of $2193.5 and 441 kg of CO2-e during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the excessive waste of unused disposable products during hand surgery cases and identifies ways of improvement.

Carbon footprints in minimally invasive surgery: Good patient outcomes, but costly for the environment

Advancements in technology and surgical training programs have increased the adaptability of minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Gastrointestinal MIS is superior to its open counterparts regarding post-operative morbidity and mortality. MIS has become the first-line surgical intervention for some types of gastrointestinal surgery, such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendicectomy. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the main gas used for insufflation in MIS. CO2 contributes 9%-26% of the greenhouse effect, resulting in global warming. The rise in global CO2 concentration since 2000 is about 20 ppm per decade, up to 10 times faster than any sustained rise in CO2 during the past 800000 years. Since 1970, there has been a steady yet worrying increase in average global temperature by 1.7 °C per century. A recent systematic review of the carbon footprint in MIS showed a range of 6-814 kg of CO2 emission per surgery, with higher CO2 emission following robotic compared to laparoscopic surgery. However, with superior benefits of MIS over open surgery, this poses an ethical dilemma to surgeons. A recent survey in the United Kingdom of 130 surgeons showed that the majority (94%) were concerned with climate change but felt that the lack of leadership was a barrier to improving environmental sustainability. Given the deleterious environmental effects of MIS, this study aims to summarize the trends of MIS and its carbon footprint, awareness and attitudes towards this issue, and efforts and challenges to ensuring environmental sustainability.

Factors contributing to the carbon footprint of cataract surgery

The healthcare sector is a significant greenhouse gas emitter. Cataract surgery is a procedure that results in a large amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. We sought to review the literature for factors contributing to the carbon footprint of this procedure. The literature, although limited, varies greatly by region. The carbon footprint of cataract surgery ranged from approximately 6 kg CO2 equivalents in a center in India to 181.9 kg CO2 equivalents in a center in the United Kingdom. Factors contributing to the carbon footprint of cataract surgery included the procurement of materials, energy use, and the emissions associated with travel. Factors facilitating a lower carbon footprint include the reuse of surgical materials and more efficient autoclave settings. Potential areas for improvement to consider include the reduction in packaging material, the reuse of materials, and potentially reducing travel emissions by performing simultaneous bilateral cataract surgery.

How Ophthalmologists Can Decarbonize Eye Care: A Review of Existing Sustainability Strategies and Steps Ophthalmologists Can Take

TOPIC

Understanding approaches to sustainability in cataract surgery and their risks and benefits.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In the United States, health care is responsible for approximately 8.5% of greenhouse gas (GHG), and cataract surgery is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures. Ophthalmologists can contribute to reducing GHG emissions, which lead to a steadily increasing list of health concerns ranging from trauma to food instability.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review to identify the benefits and risks of sustainability interventions. We then organized these interventions into a decision tree for use by individual surgeons.

RESULTS

Identified sustainability interventions fall into the domains of advocacy and education, pharmaceuticals, process, and supplies and waste. Existing literature shows certain interventions may be safe, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly. These include dispensing medications at home to patients after surgery, multi-dosing appropriate medications, training staff to properly sort medical waste, reducing the number of supplies used during surgery, and implementing immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery where clinically appropriate. The literature was lacking on the benefits or risks for some interventions, such as switching specific single-use supplies to reusables or implementing a hub-and-spoke-style operating room setup. Many of the advocacy and education interventions have inadequate literature specific to ophthalmology but are likely to have minimal risks.

CONCLUSIONS

Ophthalmologists can engage in a variety of safe and effective approaches to reduce or eliminate dangerous GHG emissions associated with cataract surgery.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Inclusion of Environmental Spillovers in Applied Economic Evaluations of Healthcare Products

OBJECTIVES

Climate change and environmental factors have an impact on human health and the ecosystem. The healthcare sector is responsible for substantial environmental pollution. Most healthcare systems rely on economic evaluation to select efficient alternatives. Nevertheless, environmental spillovers of healthcare treatments are rarely considered whether it is from a cost or a health perspective. The objective of this article is to identify economic evaluations of healthcare products and guidelines that have included any environmental dimensions.

METHODS

Electronic searches of 3 literature databases (PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE) and official health agencies guidelines were conducted. Documents were considered eligible if they assessed the environmental spillovers within the economic evaluation of a healthcare product or provided any recommendations on the inclusion of environmental spillovers in the health technology assessment process.

RESULTS

From the 3878 records identified, 62 documents were deemed eligible and 18 were published in 2021 and 2022. The environmental spillovers considered were carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, water or energy consumption, and waste disposal. The environmental spillovers were mainly assessed using the lifecycle assessment (LCA) approach while the economic analysis was mostly limited to costs. Only 9 documents, including the guidelines of 2 health agencies presented theoretical and practical ways to include environmental spillovers into the decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a clear lack of methods on whether environmental spillovers should be included in health economic evaluation and how this should be done. If healthcare systems want to reduce their environment footprint, the development of methodology which integrates environmental dimensions in health technology assessment will be key.

Modeling the Environmental and Financial Impact of Multi-dose vs. Single-dose Iodinated Contrast Media Packaging and Delivery Systems

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Iodinated contrast media (ICM) is used in computed tomography (CT) imaging to better visualize pathophysiology. ICM is commonly sold in "single-dose" bottles that require any unused volume to be discarded. Multi-dose bottles have been developed as an alternative packaging method. The objective of this study was to compare ICM waste, plastic waste, and the associated financial costs for both the single-dose and multi-dose ICM delivery systems.

METHODS

Institutional data was used to estimate the average ICM administered per CT scan, average ICM wasted per CT scan, and the total ICM volume wasted annually. Waste estimates for the multi-dose bottles were generated by applying the average ICM administered per CT scan to the larger, multi-dose bottle volumes. Single-dose bottles, multi-dose bottles and injection syringes were weighed and used to calculate plastic waste generated by both packaging methods. Financial analysis was performed to compare the cost of supplies for single-dose and multi-dose ICM delivery systems.

RESULTS

We found that 100 mL single-dose ICM bottles waste an average of 19.7 mL per CT scan, representing over 964 L of ICM wasted per year. The multi-dose ICM delivery system was projected to decrease pharmaceutical waste by at least 73% and reduce plastic waste by approximately 93%. We also estimate $494,000 in annual savings using the multi-dose ICM delivery method at our institution.

CONCLUSION

Multi-dose ICM packaging can help conserve ICM, an important pharmaceutical that was only recently severely affected supply chain disruptions. The multi-dose delivery system can also reduce plastic waste and generate substantial financial savings to offset capital investment.

Waste audits in healthcare: A systematic review and description of best practices

Healthcare generates large amounts of waste, harming both environmental and human health. Waste audits are the standard method for measuring and characterizing waste. This is a systematic review of healthcare waste audits, describing their methods and informing more standardized auditing and reporting. Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Inspec, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection databases for published studies involving direct measurement of waste in medical facilities. We screened 2398 studies, identifying 156 studies for inclusion from 37 countries. Most were conducted to improve local waste sorting policies or practices, with fewer to inform policy development, increase waste diversion or reduce costs. Measurement was quantified mostly by weighing waste, with many also counting items or using interviews or surveys to compile data. Studies spanned single procedures, departments and hospitals, and multiple hospitals or health systems. Waste categories varied, with most including municipal solid waste or biohazardous waste, and others including sharps, recycling and other wastes. There were significant differences in methods and results between high- and low-income countries. The number of healthcare waste audits published has been increasing, with variable quality and general methodologic inconsistency. A greater emphasis on consistent performance and reporting standards would improve the quality, comparability and usefulness of healthcare waste audits.

HealthcareLCA: an open-access living database of health-care environmental impact assessments

Anthropogenic environmental change negatively effects human health and is increasing health-care system demand. Paradoxically, the provision of health care, which itself is a substantial contributor to environmental degradation, is compounding this problem. There is increasing willingness to transition towards sustainable health-care systems globally and ensuring that strategy and action are informed by best available evidence is imperative. In this Personal View, we present an interactive, open-access database designed to support this effort. Functioning as a living repository of environmental impact assessments within health care, the HealthcareLCA database collates 152 studies, predominantly peer-reviewed journal articles, into one centralised and publicly accessible location, providing impact estimates (currently totalling 3671 numerical values) across 1288 health-care products and processes. The database brings together research generated over the past two decades and indicates exponential field growth.

Reducing topical drug waste in ophthalmic surgery: multisociety position paper

This position article on reducing topical drug waste with ophthalmic surgery was written by the Ophthalmic Instrument Cleaning and Sterilization Task Force, comprising representatives of the ASCRS, American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Glaucoma Society, and Outpatient Ophthalmic Surgery Society. Drug waste significantly increases the costs and carbon footprint of ophthalmic surgery. Surgical facilities should be permitted to use topical drugs in multidose containers on multiple patients until the manufacturer's labeled date of expiration, if proper guidelines are followed. Surgical patients requiring a topical medication not used for other patients should be allowed to bring that partially used medication home for postoperative use. These recommendations are based on published evidence and clarification of policies from multiple regulatory and accrediting agencies with jurisdiction over surgical facilities. Surveys suggest that most ambulatory surgery centers and hospitals performing cataract surgery are wasting topical drugs unnecessarily.

Reducing the environmental footprint of gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement

Climate change and the destruction of ecosystems by human activities are among the greatest challenges of the 21st century and require urgent action. Health care activities significantly contribute to the emission of greenhouse gases and waste production, with gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy being one of the largest contributors. This Position Statement aims to raise awareness of the ecological footprint of GI endoscopy and provides guidance to reduce its environmental impact. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) outline suggestions and recommendations for health care providers, patients, governments, and industry. MAIN STATEMENTS 1: GI endoscopy is a resource-intensive activity with a significant yet poorly assessed environmental impact. 2: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adopting immediate actions to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 3: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adherence to guidelines and implementation of audit strategies on the appropriateness of GI endoscopy to avoid the environmental impact of unnecessary procedures. 4: ESGE-ESGENA recommend the embedding of reduce, reuse, and recycle programs in the GI endoscopy unit. 5: ESGE-ESGENA suggest that there is an urgent need to reassess and reduce the environmental and economic impact of single-use GI endoscopic devices. 6: ESGE-ESGENA suggest against routine use of single-use GI endoscopes. However, their use could be considered in highly selected patients on a case-by-case basis. 7: ESGE-ESGENA recommend inclusion of sustainability in the training curricula of GI endoscopy and as a quality domain. 8: ESGE-ESGENA recommend conducting high quality research to quantify and minimize the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 9: ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy companies assess, disclose, and audit the environmental impact of their value chain. 10:  ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy should become a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions practice by 2050.

Potential Cost Savings Associated with a Multiuse Preoperative and Preinjection Eyedrop Protocol

OBJECTIVE

Calculate the cost savings associated with a multiuse preoperative and preinjection eyedrop protocol.

DESIGN

Economic analysis PARTICIPANTS: Adults undergoing ophthalmic surgical procedures requiring preoperative dilation and intravitreal injections.

METHODS

Economic modeling with scenario analysis was used to derive the value for cost-savings attributable to a protocol where perioperative mydriatic eyedrop bottles are used across multiple patients versus the current protocol where drop bottles are wasted after single patient use. Similar analyses were performed for a multiuse povidone-iodine protocol for intravitreal injections. Sensitivity analyses were used to test baseline model assumptions with varying degrees of waste and patient volume.

RESULTS

The multi-use mydriatic protocol allowed for a 97.1% reduction in the number of eyedrop bottles required for the single-use protocol (1037 bottles vs. 35850 bottles). This led to an estimated five year cost savings of approximately $240,000 (nominal) per institution (performing an average of 1434 cases/year) in the base case. This savings varied minimally in sensitivity analyses accounting for practical limitations (loss, expiration, or contamination) of multi-use containers, with savings of 97.54-95.00% for excess supply ranges from 0%-100% in the multiuse protocol. Likewise, the cost savings varied minimally in sensitivity analyses for eye drop sizes, with savings of 99.23-96.69% for mydriatic eye drop sizes of 15 microliter per drop to 65 microliter per drop, respectively, in the multi-use protocol. Over a five-year period, for povidone-iodine drops prior to performing intravitreal injection, the multi-use protocol required 153 bottles compared to 41,954 bottles (99.6% reduction) for the current single-use protocol, resulting in a nominal cost savings of $41,801, which varied minimally in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiuse perioperative mydriatic eyedrops are a viable option for cost and environmental waste reduction for ophthalmologic procedures and surgeries requiring dilation. Likewise, multiuse povidone-iodine may allow for large relative cost reduction for in office procedures. The total potential savings over five years was estimated greater than $280,000 before adjusting for inflation.

Addressing the environmental sustainability of eye health-care delivery: a scoping review

The demand for eye care-the most common medical speciality in some countries-is increasing globally due to both demographic change and the development of eye health-care services in low-income and middle-income countries. This expansion of service provision needs to be environmentally sustainable. We conducted a scoping review to establish the nature and extent of the literature describing the environmental costs of delivering eye-care services, identify interventions to diminish the environmental impact of eye care, and identify key sustainability themes that are not yet being addressed. We identified 16 peer-reviewed articles for analysis, all published since 2009. Despite a paucity of research evidence, there is a need for the measurement of environmental impacts associated with eye care to be standardised along with the methodological tools to assess these impacts. The vastly different environmental costs of delivering clinical services with similar clinical outcomes in different regulatory settings is striking; in one example, a phacoemulsification cataract extraction in a UK hospital produced more than 20 times the greenhouse gas emission of the same procedure in an Indian hospital. The environmental costs must be systematically included when evaluating the risks and benefits of new interventions or policies aimed at promoting safety in high-income countries.

Environmental sustainability and the carbon emissions of pharmaceuticals

The US healthcare industry emits an estimated 479 million tonnes of carbon dioxide each year; nearly 8% of the country's total emissions. When assessed by sector, hospital care, clinical services, medical structures, and pharmaceuticals are the top emitters. For 15 years, research has been dedicated to the medical structures and equipment that contribute to carbon emissions. More recently, hospital care and clinical services have been examined. However, the carbon of pharmaceuticals is understudied. This article will focus on the carbon emissions of pharmaceuticals since they are consistently calculated to be among the top contributors to healthcare carbon and assess the factors that contribute to pharmaceutical carbon emissions. Specifically, overprescription, pharmaceutical waste, antibiotic resistance, routine prescriptions, non-adherence, drug dependency, lifestyle prescriptions, and drugs given due to a lack of preventive healthcare will be identified. Prescribing practices have environmental ramifications. Carbon reduction, when focused on pharmaceuticals, can lead to cleaner, more sustainable healthcare.

[Sustainability in ophthalmology : Adaptation to the climate crisis and mitigation]

Die Klimakrise bedroht die Gesundheit heutiger und künftiger Generationen und stellt das Gesundheitssystem vor besondere Herausforderungen. Zur Anpassung an den anthropogene Klimawandel sind umfängliche Adaptationsstrategien und eine Mitigation des Klimawandels notwendig. In der Medizin sowie in der Augenheilkunde gibt es vielfältige Möglichkeiten zur Reduktion des CO₂(Kohlendioxid)-Fußabdrucks, die es zu ergreifen gilt, die ordnungspolitisch gefördert und eingefordert werden sollten. Das aufkommende Feld der datengesteuerten Nachhaltigkeit kann Werkzeuge liefern, um den ökologischen Fußabdruck der eigenen Tätigkeit zu evaluieren sowie Optimierungen zu initiieren. Lebenszyklusanalysen können Instrumente für systematische Ökobilanzen sein und nachhaltige Produkt- und Praxisentscheidungen ermöglichen. Das deutsche Gesundheitssystem sollte eine quantifizierbare und holistische Strategie zur CO₂-Reduktion entwickeln; Nachhaltigkeit könnte zukünftig ein Leistungsindikator sein. Dieser Artikel diskutiert mit augenärztlicher Perspektive Beispiele zur Adaptation an die Klimakrise und zur Mitigation; dies schließt kleine Maßnahmen, die jeder Einzelne umsetzen kann, als auch größere, strukturelle Ansätze ein.

Advancing the Sustainable Development Goals through improving eye health: a scoping review

UN member states have committed to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. This Review examines the published evidence on how improving eye health can contribute to advancing the SDGs (beyond SDG 3). We identified 29 studies that showed direct benefits from providing eye health services on SDGs related to one or more of poverty (SDGs 1, 2, and 8), education (SDG 4), equality (SDGs 5 and 10), and sustainable cities (SDG 11). The eye health services included cataract surgery, free cataract screening, provision of spectacles, trichiasis surgery, rehabilitation services, and rural community eye health volunteers. These findings provide a comprehensive perspective on the direct links between eye health services and advancing the SDGs. In addition, eye health services likely have indirect effects on multiple SDGs, mediated through one of the direct effects. Finally, there are additional plausible links to other SDGs, for which evidence has not yet been established.

Changing operating room practices: the effect on postoperative endophthalmitis rates following cataract surgery

PURPOSE

To determine whether four new operating room (OR) protocols instituted because of COVID-19 reduced the cataract surgical postoperative endophthalmitis rate (POE).

DESIGN

Retrospective, sequential, clinical registry study.

METHODS

85 552 sequential patients undergoing cataract surgery at the Aravind Eye Hospitals between 1 January 2020 and 25 March 2020 (56 551 in group 1) and 3 May 2020 and 31 August 2020 (29 011 in group 2). In group 1, patients were not gowned, surgical gloves were disinfected but not changed between cases, OR floors were not cleaned between every case, and multiple patients underwent preparation and surgery in the same OR. In group 2, each patient was gowned, surgical gloves were changed between each case, OR floors and counters were cleaned between patients, and only one patient at a time underwent preparation and surgery in the OR.

RESULTS

Group 1 was older, had slightly more females, and better preoperative vision. More eyes in group 2 underwent phacoemulsification (p=0.18). Three eyes (0.005%) in group 1 and 2 eyes (0.006%) in group 2 developed POE (p=0.77). Only one eye that underwent phacoemulsification developed POE; this was in group 1. There was no difference in posterior capsule rupture rate between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting a set of four temporary OR protocols that are often mandatory in the Western world did not reduce the POE rate. Along with previously published studies, these results challenge the necessity of these common practices which may be needlessly costly and wasteful, arguing for the reevaluation of empiric and potentially unnecessary guidelines that govern ophthalmic surgeries.

The carbon footprint of cataract surgery in a French University Hospital

PURPOSE

To assess the carbon footprint of cataract surgery in a French university hospital.

SETTING

Operating room of Cochin University Hospital, Paris, France.

DESIGN

Single-center component analysis.

METHODS

One day of surgery was used as a reference. Greenhouse gases (GHG) related to patient and staff transportation were calculated based on the distance travelled and the means of transportation used. The annual consumption of energy (heating and electricity) of our building was converted in kg equivalent of carbon dioxide (CO₂eq), and the principle of proportionality was used to calculate what was used for a single cataract procedure. GHG emissions related to the life cycle assessment (LCA) of the equipment used and the sterilization process were calculated.

RESULTS

The LCA of disposable items accounted for 59.49kg (73.32%) of CO₂eq for each procedure. A single procedure generated 2.83±0.10kg of waste. The average CO₂eq produced by the transportation of the patients to and from our center, adjusted for one procedure, was 7.26±6.90kg (8.95%) of CO₂eq. The CO₂eq produced by the sterilization of the phacoemulsifier handpiece was 2.12kg (2.61%). The energy consumption of the building and staff transportation accounted for the remaining CO₂eq emissions, 0.76kg (0.93%) and 0.08kg (0.10%) respectively. Altogether, the carbon footprint of one cataract procedure in our center was 81.13kg CO₂eq - the equivalent of an average car driving 800km.

CONCLUSION

Our data provide a basis to quantify cataract surgery as a source of GHG and suggests that reductions in emissions can be achieved.

Pharmaceutical and Supply Waste in Oculofacial Plastic Surgery at a Hospital-Based Outpatient Surgery Center

PURPOSE

To investigate the financial and environmental waste burden of unused disposable surgical supplies and pharmaceutical products in oculofacial plastic surgery at a hospital-based outpatient surgery center.

METHODS

This descriptive study was performed at a single academic hospital-based outpatient surgery center. Unused pharmaceuticals and disposable surgical materials were recorded for each of 34 consecutive oculofacial plastic surgeries performed by the same surgical team. Pharmaceutical products were grouped as local anesthetic (tetracaine, bupivacaine, lidocaine, and sodium bicarbonate), intraoperative (basic saline solution, methylene blue, and oxymetazoline hydrochloride), or antiseptic/antimicrobial (erythromycin ointment and hydrogen peroxide). Percentage of unused pharmaceutical product and disposable surgical material were calculated and extrapolated to direct costs to the institution and greenhouse gas emissions.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of disposable surgical supply waste per case was 11.6% ($29.32). The mean percentage of pharmaceutical waste was 96.1% ($271.84) for local anesthetic, 71.0% ($163.47) for intraoperative medications, and 26.7% ($2.19) for antiseptic medication. The mean emissions per surgical case for unused disposable surgical equipment and unused pharmaceutical product were 10 and 103 kg of carbon equivalent gases (kg CO2-e), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical supply waste was nominal, but pharmaceutical waste was considerable in this single hospital-based outpatient surgery center study. There may exist opportunities for quality improvement in waste, especially pharmacologic burden, in oculofacial plastic surgery.

Sunlight powered degradation of pentoxifylline Cs0.5Li0.5FeO2 as a green reusable photocatalyst: Mechanism, kinetics and toxicity studies

The degradation of Pentoxifylline (PXF) was achieved successfully by green energy in a built-in solar photocatalytic system using hybrid LiCs ferrites (Li_0.5Cs_0.5FeO₂) as magnetically recoverable photocatalysts. Kinetics showed a first-order reaction rate with maximum PXF removal of 94.91% at mildly acidic pH; additionally, the ferromagnetic properties of catalyst allowed recovery and reuse multiple times, reducing costs and time in degradation processes. The degradation products were identified by HPLC-MS and allowed us to propose a thermodynamically feasible mechanism that was validated through DFT calculations. Additionally, toxicity studies have been performed in bacteria and yeast where high loadings of Cs showed to be harmful to Staphylococcus aureus (MIC≥ 4.0 mg/mL); Salmonella typhi (MIC≥ 8.0 mg/mL) and Candida albicans (MIC≥ 10.0 mg/mL). The presented setup shows effectiveness and robustness in a degradation process using alternative energy sources for the elimination of non-biodegradable pollutants.

Survey of cataract surgeons' and nurses' attitudes toward operating room waste

In an online survey of more than 1300 cataract surgeons and nurses, 93% believed that operating room waste is excessive and should be reduced; 78% believed that we should reuse more supplies; 90% were concerned about global warming; and 87% wanted medical societies to advocate for reducing the surgical carbon footprint. The most commonly cited reasons for excessive waste were regulatory and manufacturer restrictions on reuse or multiple use of devices, supplies, and pharmaceuticals. More than 90% believed that profit, liability reduction, and failure to consider carbon footprint drive manufacturers to produce more single-use products; more than 90% want more reusable products and more regulatory and manufacturer discretion over when and which products can be reused. Assuming comparable cost, 79% of surgeons preferred reusable over disposable instruments. In order of decreasing consensus, most were interested in reusing topical and intracameral medications, phacoemulsification tips, irrigating solutions/tubing, blades, cannulas, devices, and surgical gowns.

Quantifying the cost of single-use minims and multidose bottles for eye drops in routine ophthalmic practice: a multicentre study

OBJECTIVE

To compare costs between two different eye drop delivery modalities: multidose bottles and single-use minims.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Monthly dilating eye drop costs and quantities (tropicamide 1%, phenylephrine 2.5%, cyclopentolate 1%) were studied over a 2-year period between April 2013 and March 2015 at 2 tertiary ophthalmic centres (Royal Alexandra Hospital [RAH, Edmonton] and Rockyview General Hospital [RGH, Calgary]). In April 2014, RAH switched its dilating eye drop practice from predominantly multidose bottles to single-use minims, whereas RGH continued using predominantly multidose bottles. Eye drop volume and total and per-patient eye drop costs were quantified at RAH before switching (pre-intervention) and after (post-intervention) using an interrupted time-series analysis with RGH as a control. A counterfactual analysis was also performed. Significance was obtained using independent t-testing.

RESULTS

After switching to single-use minims, RAH experienced changes in the following: an increase in single-use minims as a proportion of total eye drop utilization (from 5.6% to 89.1%; p = 0.001), an increase in total eye drop cost by $2117 per month (95% confidence interval [CI], $1354-$2880; p < 0.001), an increase in per-patient costs by $984 per 1000 patients per month (95% CI, $674-$1293). Contrastingly, RGH did not experience similar changes. Ultimately, the cost of switching to single-use minims was $22 481 (95% CI, $7830-$31 336) over a 12-month period.

CONCLUSIONS

If safe eye drop practices are enforced via proper protocols, the use of multidose bottles may be a more cost-effective option than single-use minims for routine clinical practice.

Operating in a Climate Crisis: A State-of-the-Science Review of Life Cycle Assessment within Surgical and Anesthetic Care

BACKGROUND

Both human health and the health systems we depend on are increasingly threatened by a range of environmental crises, including climate change. Paradoxically, health care provision is a significant driver of environmental pollution, with surgical and anesthetic services among the most resource-intensive components of the health system.

OBJECTIVES

This analysis aimed to summarize the state of life cycle assessment (LCA) practice as applied to surgical and anesthetic care via review of extant literature assessing environmental impacts of related services, procedures, equipment, and pharmaceuticals.

METHODS

A state-of-the-science review was undertaken following a registered protocol and a standardized, LCA-specific reporting framework. Three bibliographic databases (Scopus®, PubMed, and Embase®) and the gray literature were searched. Inclusion criteria were applied, eligible entries critically appraised, and key methodological data and results extracted.

RESULTS

From 1,316 identified records, 44 studies were eligible for inclusion. The annual climate impact of operating surgical suites ranged between 3,200,000 and 5,200,000 kg CO2e. The climate impact of individual surgical procedures varied considerably, with estimates ranging from 6 to 1,007 kg CO2e. Anesthetic gases; single-use equipment; and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system operation were the main emissions hot spots identified among operating room- and procedure-specific analyses. Single-use equipment used in surgical settings was generally more harmful than equivalent reusable items across a range of environmental parameters. Life cycle inventories have been assembled and associated climate impacts calculated for three anesthetic gases (2-85 kg CO2e/MAC-h) and 20 injectable anesthetic drugs (0.01-3.0 kg CO2e/gAPI).

DISCUSSION

Despite the recent proliferation of surgical and anesthesiology-related LCAs, extant studies address a miniscule fraction of the numerous services, procedures, and products available today. Methodological heterogeneity, external validity, and a lack of background life cycle inventory data related to many essential surgical and anesthetic inputs are key limitations of the current evidence base. This review provides an indication of the spectrum of environmental impacts associated with surgical and anesthetic care at various scales. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8666.

Improving productivity, costs and environmental impact in International Eye Health Services: using the 'Eyefficiency' cataract surgical services auditing tool to assess the value of cataract surgical services

Objective

Though one of the most common surgeries, there is limited information on variability of practices in cataract surgeries. ‘Eyefficiency’ is a cataract surgical services auditing tool to help global units improve their surgical productivity and reduce their costs, waste generation and carbon footprint. The aim of the present research is to identify variability and efficiency opportunities in cataract surgical practices globally.

Methods and Analysis

9 global cataract surgical facilities used the Eyefficiency tool to collect facility-level data (staffing, pathway steps, costs of supplies and energy use), and live time-and-motion data. A point person from each site gathered and reported data on 1 week or 30 consecutive cataract surgeries. Environmental life cycle assessment and descriptive statistics were used to quantify productivity, costs and carbon footprint. The main outcomes were estimates of productivity, costs, greenhouse gas emissions, and solid waste generation per-case at each site.

Results

Nine participating sites recorded 475 cataract extractions (a mix of phacoemulsification and manual small incision). Cases per hour ranged from 1.7 to 4.48 at single-bed sites and 1.47 to 4.25 at dual-bed sites. Average per-case expenditures ranged between £31.55 and £399.34, with a majority of costs attributable to medical equipment and supplies. Average solid waste ranged between 0.19 kg and 4.27 kg per phacoemulsification, and greenhouse gases ranged from 41 kg carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) to 130 kg CO2e per phacoemulsification.

Conclusion

Results demonstrate the global diversity of cataract surgical services and non-clinical metrics. Eyefficiency supports local decision-making for resource efficiency and could help identify regional or global best practices for optimising productivity, costs and environmental impact of cataract surgery.

Medical Waste Due to Intravitreal Injection Procedures in a Retina Clinic

Purpose:

Medical waste contributes to health care costs and has a direct negative impact on the environment. The goals of this study are to quantify and categorize the medical waste generated by intravitreal injection procedures and identify opportunities to reduce waste.

Methods:

This is a prospective observational series. Medical waste from intravitreal injections was collected from 337 consecutive intravitreal injections by a retina specialist over 2 weeks. The waste was sorted, photographed, weighed, and recorded.

Results:

A total of 65.6 kg of waste was collected across 3 broad categories: (1) shipping waste (cardboard boxes, foam coolers, cold packs, and bubble wrap); (2) waste from administering the intravitreal injection (nitrile gloves, tissues, wipes, and plastic or paper packaging); and (3) biohazard waste (used syringes and needles). Shipping waste contributed 83% of the overall waste, by mass, and varied greatly based on the size of the order and how efficiently shipments were packed. Cold packs, foam coolers, cardboard/paper, and nitrile gloves were the greatest contributors to carbon emissions and landfill.

Conclusions:

Waste due to shipping of medication is a major opportunity for reducing the environmental impact of intravitreal injections. Buying in bulk is a simple way for retina practices to reduce waste. Manufacturers should consider less bulky packaging for branded intravitreal injections; distributors and outsourcing facilities should consider take-back programs to reuse coolers and cold packs. Improved sustainability in the treatment of retinal disease is achievable but requires awareness and optimization of a clinic’s routine.