Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Feb 1;236(2):411-423.
doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000478. Epub 2022 Nov 30.

Environmental Impact and Cost Savings of Operating Room Quality Improvement Initiatives: A Scoping Review

Affiliations

Environmental Impact and Cost Savings of Operating Room Quality Improvement Initiatives: A Scoping Review

Gwyneth A Sullivan et al. J Am Coll Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Operating rooms are major contributors to a hospital's carbon footprint due to the large volumes of resources consumed and waste produced. The objective of this study was to identify quality improvement initiatives that aimed to reduce the environmental impact of the operating room while decreasing costs.

Study design: A literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Google Scholar and included broad terms for "operating room," "costs," and "environment" or "sustainability." The "triple bottom line" framework, which considers the environmental, financial, and social impacts of interventions to guide decision making, was used to inform data extraction. The studies were then categorized using the 5 "Rs" of sustainability-refuse, reduce, reuse, repurpose, and recycle-and the impacts were discussed using the triple bottom line framework.

Results: A total of 23 unique quality improvement initiatives describing 28 interventions were included. Interventions were categorized as "refuse" (n = 11; 39.3%), "reduce" (n = 8; 28.6%), "reuse" (n = 3; 10.7%), and "recycle" (n = 6; 21.4%). While methods of measuring environmental impact and cost savings varied greatly among studies, potential annual cost savings ranged from $873 (intervention: education on diverting recyclable materials from sharps containers; environmental impact: 11.4 kg sharps waste diverted per month) to $694,141 (intervention: education to reduce regulated medical waste; environmental impact: 30% reduction in regulated medical waste).

Conclusions: Quality improvement initiatives that reduce both cost and environmental impact have been successfully implemented across a variety of centers both nationally and globally. Surgeons, healthcare practitioners, and administrators interested in environmental stewardship and working toward a culture of sustainability may consider similar interventions in their institutions.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. United Nations. Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; 2015.
    1. Allen MR, Babiker M, Chen Y, et al. Global Warming of 1.5°C. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2018.
    1. Healthcare Without Harm. Health care’s climate footprint: how the health sector contributes to the global climate crisis and opportunities for action; 2019.
    1. Eckelman MJ, Sherman J. Environmental impacts of the U.S. health care system and effects on public health. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0157014.
    1. Chung JW, Meltzer DO. Estimate of the carbon footprint of the US health care sector. JAMA. 2009;302:1970–1972.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources