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

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

A logistical perspective on the growth of lorry traffic

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:9349.436(31) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

The consolidation of retail deliveries Its effect on CO_2 emissions

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:9349.436(30) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreSIGLEGBUnited Kingdo

Comparison of duke activity status index with cardiopulmonary exercise testing in cancer patients

Purpose: The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI), a patient-administered questionnaire, is used to quantify functional capacity in patients undergoing cancer surgery. Methods: This retrospective cohort study assessed whether the DASI was accurate in predicting peak oxygen consumption (pVO2) that was objectively measured using cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in 43 consecutive patients scheduled for elective major cancer surgery at a tertiary cancer centre. The primary outcome measured the limits of agreement between DASI-predicted pVO2 and actual measured pVO2. Results: The study population was elderly (median 63 years, interquartile range 18), 58% were male, with the majority having intraabdominal cancer surgery. Although the DASI scores were statistically related to the measured pVO2 (N = 43, adjusted R2 = 0.20, p = 0.002), both the bias (8 ml kg− 1 min− 1) and 95% limits of agreement (19.5 to − 3.4 ml kg− 1 min− 1) between the predicted and measured pVO2 were large. Using some of the individual components, recalibrating the intercept and regression coefficient of the total DASI score did not substantially improve its ability to predict the measured pVO2. Conclusion: In summary, both the limits of agreement and bias between the measured and DASI-predicted pVO2 were substantial. The DASI-predicted pVO2 based on patient’s assessment of their functional status could not be considered a reliable surrogate of measured pVO2 during CPET for the population of patients pending major cancer surgery and cannot, therefore, be used as a triage tool for referral to CPET centres for objective risk assessment

A national perspective on the decline of abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer

Objective: To assess rates of abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER) for rectal cancer between centers and over time, and to evaluate the influence of patient characteristics, including social deprivation, on,APER rate. Methods: Data on patients undergoing APER or anterior resection (AR) in England were extracted from a national administrative database for the years 1996 to 2004. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients presenting with rectal cancer undergoing APER. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with a nonrestorative resection. Results: Data on 52,643 patients were analyzed, 13,109(24.9%) of whom underwent APER. The APER rate significantly reduced over the study period from 29.4% to 21.2% (P < 0.001). Operative mortality following AR decreased significantly during the period of study (5. 1 % to 4.2%, P = 0.002), while that following APER did not (P = 0.075). Male patients were more likely to undergo APER (P < 0.001), whereas those with an emergency presentation more commonly underwent AR (P < 0.00 1). Independent predictors of increased APER rate were male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.239, P < 0.001) and social deprivation (most vs. least deprived; OR 1.589, P < 0.001), whereas increasing patient age (OR = 0.977, P = 0.027 per 10-year increase), year of study (2003/4 vs. 1996/7; OR = 0.646, P < 0.001) and initial presentation as an emergency (OR = 0.713, P < 0.001) were associated with lower APER rates. After accounting for case-mix, there was significant between-center variability in APER rates. Conclusion: Socially deprived patients were more likely to undergo abdominoperineal resection. Significant improvements in rates of nonrestorative resection were seen over time but although short-term outcomes following AR have improved, those following APER have not. Permanent stoma rates following rectal cancer surgery may be considered a surrogate marker of surgical qualit