No abstract

The next decade is likely to produce any number of global challenges that will affect health and health care, including pan-national infections such as the new coronavirus COVID-19 and others that will be related to global warming. Nurses will be required to react to these events, even though they will also be affected as ordinary citizens. The future resilience of healthcare services will depend on having sufficient numbers of nurses who are adequately resourced to face the coming challenges.

No abstract

The U.S. health care sector is highly interconnected with industrial activities that emit much of the nation’s pollution to air, water, and soils. We estimate emissions directly and indirectly attributable to the health care sector, and potential harmful effects on public health. Negative environmental and public health outcomes were estimated through economic input-output life cycle assessment (EIOLCA) modeling using National Health Expenditures (NHE) for the decade 2003–2013 and compared to national totals. In 2013, the health care sector was also responsible for significant fractions of national air pollution emissions and impacts, including acid rain (12%), greenhouse gas emissions (10%), smog formation (10%) criteria air pollutants (9%), stratospheric ozone depletion (1%), and carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic air toxics (1–2%). The largest contributors to impacts are discussed from both the supply side (EIOLCA economic sectors) and demand side (NHE categories), as are trends over the study period. Health damages from these pollutants are estimated at 470,000 DALYs lost from pollution-related disease, or 405,000 DALYs when adjusted for recent shifts in power generation sector emissions. These indirect health burdens are commensurate with the 44,000–98,000 people who die in hospitals each year in the U.S. as a result of preventable medical errors, but are currently not attributed to our health system. Concerted efforts to improve environmental performance of health care could reduce expenditures directly through waste reduction and energy savings, and indirectly through reducing pollution burden on public health, and ought to be included in efforts to improve health care quality and safety.

Our results reiterate previous published data on the GHG effects of these inhaled drugs, while providing a life cycle context. There are several practical environmental impact mitigation strategies. Desflurane and nitrous oxide should be restricted to cases where they may reduce morbidity and mortality over alternative drugs. Clinicians should avoid unnecessarily high fresh gas flow rates for all inhaled drugs. There are waste anesthetic gas capturing systems, and even in advance of reprocessed gas applications, strong consideration should be given to their use. From our results it appears likely that techniques other than inhalation anesthetics, such as total i.v. anesthesia, neuraxial, or peripheral nerve blocks, would be least harmful to the environment.

The healthcare sector is a driver of economic growth in the U.S., with spending on healthcare in 2012 reaching $2.8 trillion, or 17% of the U.S. gross domestic product, but it is also a significant source of emissions that adversely impact environmental and public health. The current state of the healthcare industry offers significant opportunities for environmental efficiency improvements, potentially leading to reductions in costs, resource use, and waste without compromising patient care. However, limited research exists that can provide quantitative, sustainable solutions. The operating room is the most resource-intensive area of a hospital, and surgery is therefore an important focal point to understand healthcare-related emissions. Hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) was used to quantify environmental emissions from four different surgical approaches (abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic, and robotic) used in the second most common major procedure for women in the U.S., the hysterectomy. Data were collected from 62 cases of hysterectomy. Life cycle assessment results show that major sources of environmental emissions include the production of disposable materials and single-use surgical devices, energy used for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning, and anesthetic gases. By scientifically evaluating emissions, the healthcare industry can strategically optimize its transition to a more sustainable system.

Background Climate change threatens to undermine the past 50 years of gains in public health. In response, the National Health Service (NHS) in England has been working since 2008 to quantify and reduce its carbon footprint. This Article presents the latest update to its greenhouse gas accounting, identifying interventions for mitigation efforts and describing an approach applicable to other health systems across the world. Methods A hybrid model was used to quantify emissions within Scopes 1, 2, and 3 of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, as well as patient and visitor travel emissions, from 1990 to 2019. This approach complements the broad coverage of top-down economic modelling with the high accuracy of bottom-up data wherever available. Available data were backcasted or forecasted to cover all years. To enable the identification of measures to reduce carbon emissions, results were disaggregated by organisation type. Findings In 2019, the health service's emissions totalled 25 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, a reduction of 26% since 1990, and a decrease of 64% in the emissions per inpatient finished admission episode. Of the 2019 footprint, 62% came from the supply chain, 24% from the direct delivery of care, 10% from staff commute and patient and visitor travel, and 4% from private health and care services commissioned by the NHS. Interpretation This work represents the longest and most comprehensive accounting of national health-care emissions globally, and underscores the importance of incorporating bottom-up data to improve the accuracy of top-down modelling and enabling detailed monitoring of progress as health systems act to reduce emissions. Funding Wellcome Trust.

The detrimental health effects of climate change continue to increase. Although health systems respond to this disease burden, healthcare itself pollutes the atmosphere, land, and waterways. We surveyed the 'state of the art' environmental sustainability research in anaesthesia and critical care, addressing why it matters, what is known, and ideas for future work. Focus is placed upon the atmospheric chemistry of the anaesthetic gases, recent work clarifying their relative global warming potentials, and progress in waste anaesthetic gas treatment. Life cycle assessment (LCA; i.e. 'cradle to grave' analysis) is introduced as the definitive method used to compare and contrast ecological footprints of products, processes, and systems. The number of LCAs within medicine has gone from rare to an established body of knowledge in the past decade that can inform doctors of the relative ecological merits of different techniques. LCAs with practical outcomes are explored, such as the carbon footprint of reusable vs single-use anaesthetic devices (e.g. drug trays, laryngoscope blades, and handles), and the carbon footprint of treating an ICU patient with septic shock. Avoid, reduce, reuse, recycle, and reprocess are then explored. Moving beyond routine clinical care, the vital influences that the source of energy (renewables vs fossil fuels) and energy efficiency have in healthcare's ecological footprint are highlighted. Discussion of the integral roles of research translation, education, and advocacy in driving the perioperative and critical care environmental sustainability agenda completes this review.