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
Case Reports
. 2023 Jul;10(2):157-160.
doi: 10.7861/fhj.2022-0129.

A mixed-methods analysis of the climate impact, acceptability, feasibility and cost of switching from single-use pulp to reusable plastic trays in a large NHS trust

Calum Byrne  1   2 , Caitlin Pley  1   2 , Philipp Schorscher  1 , Zoe Brandon  1 , Paul Gatumbu  1 , Claire Mallinson  1 , Madhvi Vaghela  1
Affiliations
Case Reports

A mixed-methods analysis of the climate impact, acceptability, feasibility and cost of switching from single-use pulp to reusable plastic trays in a large NHS trust

Calum Byrne et al. Future Healthc J. 2023 Jul.

Abstract

A large, multi-site NHS trust piloted switching from single-use pulp to reusable plastic trays for use in clinical care. This mixed-methods analysis combines quantitative cost-effectiveness and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions calculations with a stakeholder analysis and user survey to not only ascertain the cost and climate implications of this intervention, but to also better understand the use of trays across the trust to improve staff buy-in and, ultimately, the feasibility and success of the policy. We show that the plastic trays are both more cost-effective and climate friendly compared with the pulp trays, even using an annual replacement rate of 50% (higher than our anticipated rate of 5%), and that staff and key stakeholders would support the policy. Our analysis is one example of a larger trend in the return to reusable items, as awareness grows of the significant GHG emissions and waste produced from disposable, single-use items in healthcare.

Keywords: climate change; environment; quality improvement; recycling; sustainability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
Comparative analysis of pulp and plastic trays by (a) annual cost and (b) cumulative cost. Percentage figures represent different rates of annual replacement of plastic trays to account for loss and damage. Pulp-tray figures assume the amount procured during the 2021–2022 procurement year remains unchanged for the next 5 years.
Fig 2.
Fig 2.
Comparative analysis of pulp and plastic trays by carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions, shown (a) annually and (b) cumulatively. Percentage figures represent different rates of annual replacement of plastic trays to account for loss and damage. Pulp-tray figures assume the amount procured during the 2021–2022 procurement year remains unchanged for the next 5 years.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tennison I, Roschnik S, Ashby B, et al. . Health care's response to climate change: a carbon footprint assessment of the NHS in England. Lancet Planet Health 2021;5:e84–92. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Delivering a ‘net zero’ National Health Service. London: NHS England and NHS Improvement, 2022.
    1. The Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, Royal College of Surgeons of England and Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow . Intercollegiate Green Theatre Checklist. www.rcsed.ac.uk/media/1331734/green-theatre-posters-rcsed-a4-161022.pdf [Accessed 2 June 2023].
    1. Government conversion factors for company reporting of greenhouse gas emissions. London: Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, 2022.
    1. Throwing away the future: how companies still have it wrong on plastic pollution “solutions”. Amsterdam: Greenpeace, 2019.

Publication types