Medical waste production and disposal arising from renal replacement therapy

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.

Healthcare waste management in the Tamale Central Hospital, northern Ghana. An assessment before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ghana

Healthcare waste (HCW) poses several environmental and public health challenges. However, much attention has not been given to its management. The present study sought to assess the healthcare waste management (HCWM) practices in the Tamale Central Hospital (TCH) by characterizing and measuring the quantities of waste generated and the associated implications. Observation of the value chain of healthcare waste management, waste quantification using a weighing scale (Top-pan-spring balance), and semi-structured interviews were used in the data collection. The study revealed that, except for sharps, there was no segregation of infectious and non-infectious waste, and healthcare waste was not treated before final disposal. The study showed that a daily record of 5.1 kg of sharps, 24.46 kg of infectious waste and 59.45 kg of general waste was generated. The maternity ward produced more general waste (14 kg), whereas the theatre generated the highest infectious waste (5.70 kg) and sharps (0.8 kg) daily. Generally, the maternity ward recorded the highest daily waste generation of 17.9 kg. The waste treatment method available in the hospital was incineration. However, the incinerator was found to be dysfunctional. Thus, an improvised method (dug pit) was used irrespective of the associated health and environmental implications. The study also revealed that the hospital did not quantify the amount of solid waste that was generated. Inadequate finance and lack of supervision were linked to the problem of poor healthcare waste management in the study area. Also, 82% of the workers mentioned that there was poor HCW segregation at the departments whereas 76% of the patients who received healthcare at the facility were unsatisfied with the HCWM practices. A strong linear relationship in the responses made was recorded. The healthcare waste management index showed that the HCWM practice at the facility was unsatisfactory as it was medium-ranked. The study, therefore, recommends that the hospital considers constructing an on-site waste treatment facility, segregate and quantify waste for effective allocation of resources for treating healthcare waste.

Evaluating hazardous waste generation in for-profit outpatient haemodialysis centres

BACKGROUND

"Green" haemodialysis management to reduce the environmental impact of haemodialysis is growing.

OBJECTIVES

Dealing with hazardous waste production could heighten healthcare professionals' awareness of this problem, and improve their healthcare involvement in environmental sustainability and environmental-friendliness.

DESIGN AND MEASUREMENTS

A list of for-profit outpatient haemodialysis centres in the Valencian Community (E Spain) was compiled. Data on their hazardous waste production from 2008 to 2012 through the annual waste reports issued by official organisations competent in environmental issues were collected.

RESULTS

There are 22 for-profit dialysis centres, that managed the treatment for 69.1% of all dialysis patients in the region. Data were collected from 16 centres that collectively offer 350 dialysis places (33.8% of all the places in this region). Mean annual hazardous waste production per dialysis session increased by 14% during the study period: 0.640 kg per session in 2008 vs. 0.740 kg in 2012.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

As hazardous waste production is high, we must examine the reasons why it is growing. Information about haemodialysis waste production and management is scarce and difficult to access. Having an evaluation of its production would motivate further research, especially as end-stage kidney disease is increasing, and whose main long-term treatment, haemodialysis, produces hazardous waste and employs substantial natural resources. Minimising its environmental impact is not mission impossible.

Development of certified environmental management in hospital and outpatient haemodialysis units

INTRODUCTION

The environmental impact of haemodialysis is very high. Institutional activity in this sense is important, even in the production of references. Voluntary environmental management systems (EMS), environmental management and auditing systems (EMAS) and the International Organization for Standardization standards (ISO 14001) are important tools for environmental protection, together with legislation, taxation and tax benefits.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the degree of implementation of EMS in hospital units and outpatient haemodialysis in the Spanish National Health System to provide a group of reference centres in environmental management in this healthcare activity.

METHODS

Development of a list by autonomous communities showing hospital and outpatient dialysis units using an EMAS and/or ISO 14001 in 2012-2013. The sources of information were the Spanish National Catalogue of Hospitals, Spanish Registry of Healthcare Certification and Accreditation, European and regional EMAS records, world ISO registrations, dialysis centre lists from scientific societies and patients, responses from accredited entities in Spain for environmental certification and the institutional website of each haemodialysis centre identified.

RESULTS

Of the 210 hospitals with a dialysis unit, 53 (25%) have the ISO 14001 and 15 of these also have an EMAS). This constitutes 30% of all hospital dialysis chairs in Spain: 1,291 (of 4,298). Only 11 outpatient clinics are recorded, all with the ISO 14001.

DISCUSSION

There is no official documentation of the implementation of EMS in dialysis units. Making this list provides an approach to the situation, with special reference to haemodialysis because of its significant environmental impact.

Eco-dialysis: the financial and ecological costs of dialysis waste products: is a 'cradle-to-cradle' model feasible for planet-friendly haemodialysis waste management?

BACKGROUND

Approximately 2 million chronic haemodialysis patients produce over 2,000,000 tons of waste per year that includes about 600,000 tons of potentially hazardous waste. The aim of the present study was to analyse the characteristics of the waste that is produced through chronic haemodialysis in an effort to identify strategies to reduce its environmental and financial impact.

METHODS

The study included three dialysis machines and disposables for bicarbonate dialysis, haemodiafiltration (HFR) and lactate dialysis. Hazardous waste is defined as waste that comes into contact with bodily fluids. The weight and cost of waste management was evaluated by various policies of differentiation, ranging from a careful-optimal differentiation to a careless one. The amount of time needed for optimal management was recorded in 30 dialysis sessions. Non-hazardous materials were assessed for potential recycling.

RESULTS

The amount of plastic waste that is produced per dialysis session ranges from 1.5 to 8 kg (from 1.1 to 8 kg of potentially hazardous waste), depending upon the type of dialysis machine and supplies, differentiation and emptying policies. The financial cost of waste disposal is high, and is mainly related to hazardous waste disposal, with costs ranging from 2.2 to 16 Euro per session (2.7-21 USD) depending on the waste management policy. The average amount of time needed for careful, optimal differentiation disposal is approximately 1 minute for a haemodialysis session and 2 minutes for HFR. The ecological cost is likewise high: less than one-third of non-hazardous waste (23-28%) is potentially recyclable, while the use of different types of plastic, glues, inks and labels prevents the remaining materials from being recycled.

CONCLUSION

Acknowledging the problem of waste management in dialysis could lead to savings of hundreds of millions of Dollars and to the reuse and recycling of hundreds of tons of plastic waste per year on a world-wide scale with considerable financial and ecological savings.