Awareness and barriers to sustainability in dentistry: A scoping review

Quantification of single use plastics waste generated in clinical dental practice and hospital settings

“…There is though, a recognition of the need to transfer the plastic used from its current linear life cycle of synthesis from fossil-based constituents and waste management to a circular plastic economy [42,43]. A circular economy uses renewable and/or biobased constituent materials for the fabrication of SUP items with the subsequent recovery and recycling as valued feedstock for the synthesis of new plastics.…”

Regulating Environmental Impact of Medical Devices in the United Kingdom—A Scoping Review

“…The Health Technical Memoranda reviewed in this study include HTM 01-01, 01-05, 01-06 (guidelines on management and decontamination of medical equipment, linen, dental care practice and flexible endoscopes) and 07-01 (guidelines on management of healthcare waste) along with the guidance on reprocessing and re-manufacturing of medical devices [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. For the purpose of this review, it is assumed that the best-practice guidelines meet the requirements of all associated regulations, and reviewing these guidelines along with relevant literature should help scope the challenges based on secondary sources, similar to inferences by Martin et al for dental care devices [39].…”

“…A survey by Moultrie et al [10] further suggests that designers find current regulations discourage designing for the environment and that manufacturers need to be educated about the opportunities to save expenses in developing sustainable medical devices. Under the theme of knowledge exchange, Martin et al [39] suggest that there is a lack of encouragement in curricula for sustainable practices in dentistry. Furthermore, while many universities encourage the design and development of medical devices, and provide a platform for research and development in this field, there is very little evidence of education of regulatory structures governing medical devices in the United States of America (USA) and UK academic programmes, as found in a study by Hendricusdottir et al [56].…”

“…However, the current regulations suggest otherwise in some cases. Martin et al note that a significant increase in the generation of biomedical waste in dental practices in the UK over the past few decades can be attributed to increased use of single-use devices and regulation that is confusing staff on best practice and segregation of wastes for sustainable management, among other things [39]. The increasing use of plastics, although providing inexpensive and wideranging uses in the medical device industry, is unattractive economically for recycling, thus being relegated to disposal in landfills.…”

“…The interpretation of HTM 01-05 has also frustrated users, leading to confusion in sustainable practices while trying to avoid litigation. Martin et al [39] find that the legislation and regulation of safe disposal of dental amalgam is varied and inconsistent across the world, leading to the risk of higher contribution of mercury toxicity in the environment. Technology, in the form of dental separators, exists to ensure safe disposal of mercury, but this technology is not used all over the world, and there continues to be resistance from the dental profession to mandate dental separators in legislation.…”