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

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

Application of a new system for classifying root canal morphology in undergraduate teaching and clinical practice: a national survey in Malaysia

Aim To evaluate and compare the feedback of final year undergraduate dental students in eight Malaysian dental schools on the application of a new system for classifying root canal morphology in teaching and clinical practice. Methods One PowerPoint presentation describing two classification systems for root canal morphology (Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology, 1974 38, 456 and its supplemental configurations, International Endodontic Journal 2017, 50, 761) was delivered to final year undergraduate dental students in eight dental schools in Malaysia by two presenters (each presented to four schools). To examine students' feedback on the utility of each system, printed questionnaires consisting of six questions (five multiple choice questions and one open-ended question) were distributed and collected after the lecture. The questionnaire was designed to compare the classification systems in terms of accuracy, practicability, understanding of root canal morphology and recommendation for use in pre-clinical and clinical courses. The exact test was used for statistical analysis, with the level of significance set at 0.05 (P = 0.05). Results A total of 382 (out of 447) students participated giving a response rate of 86%. More than 90% of students reported that the new system was more accurate and more practical compared with the Vertucci system (P 0.05). The students' responses for all questions were almost similar for both presenters (P > 0.05). Conclusions The new system of International Endodontic Journal 2017, 50, 761 for classifying root and canal morphology was favoured by final year undergraduate dental students in Malaysia. The new system has the potential to be included in the undergraduate endodontic curriculum for teaching courses related to root and canal morphology