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

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

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 coprioritized 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

Dedicated anticoagulation management protocols in fragility femoral fracture care – a source of significant variance and limited effectiveness in improving time to surgery: The hip and femoral fracture anticoagulation surgical timing evaluation (HASTE) study

\ua9 2024 The Author(s)Introduction: Approximately 20 % of femoral fragility fracture patients take anticoagulants, typically warfarin or Direct Oral AntiCoagulant (DOAC). These can impact timing of surgery affecting patient survival. Due to several possible approaches and numerous factors to consider in the preoperative workup of anticoagulated patients, potential for variations in clinical practice exist. Some hospitals employ dedicated anticoagulation management protocols to address this issue, and to improve time to surgery. This study aimed to determine the proportion of hospitals with such protocols, compare protocol guidance between hospitals, and evaluate the effectiveness of protocols in facilitating prompt surgery. Methods: Data was prospectively collected through a collaborative, multicentre approach involving hospitals across the UK. Femoral fragility fracture patients aged ≥60 years and admitted to hospital between 1st May to 31st July 2023 were included. Information from dedicated anticoagulation management protocols were collated on several domains relating to perioperative care including administration of reversal agents and instructions on timing of surgery as well as others. Logistic regression was used to evaluate effects of dedicated protocols on time to surgery. Results: Dedicated protocols for management of patients taking warfarin and DOACs were present at 41 (52.6 %) and 43 (55.1 %) hospitals respectively. For patients taking warfarin, 39/41 (95.1 %) protocols specified the dose of vitamin k and the most common was 5 milligrams intravenously (n=21). INR threshold values for proceeding to surgery varied between protocols; 1.5 (n=28), 1.8 (n=6), and 2 (n=6). For patients taking DOACs, 35/43 (81.4 %) and 8/43 (18.6 %) protocols advised timing of surgery based on renal function and absolute time from last dose respectively. Analysis of 10,197 patients from 78 hospitals showed fewer patients taking DOACs received surgery within 36 h of admission at hospitals with a dedicated protocol compared to those without (adjusted OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54–0.99, p=0.040), while there were no differences among patients taking warfarin (adjusted OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.75–3.57, p=0.219). Conclusions: Around half of hospitals employed a dedicated anticoagulation management protocol for femoral fragility fracture patients, and substantial variation was observed in guidance between protocols. Dedicated protocols currently being used at hospitals were ineffective at improving the defined targets for time to surgery