Switching to reusable operating theatre equipment: lessons learnt from sterile light handle projects in two Australian hospitals.

Abstract

Background: Replacing single-use operating theatre equipment with reusables might be one strategy for reducing the carbon footprint of operating theatres. However, in Australia, where the energy mix is predominantly fossil-fuel-based, the re-sterilization of reusables may increase the carbon footprint. We analyzed the financial and environmental impacts of introducing reusable operating theatre light handles in two NSW hospitals.

Methods: The effects on cost, waste, and carbon footprint of replacing disposable light handle covers with reusable handles in each hospital were analyzed over 12 months using procurement, waste and sterilization data, and life cycle assessment.

Results: Energy requirement for sterilization of reusable handles, increasing alongside weight of the handle, resulted in higher carbon footprint than using disposable covers. At one hospital, using a heavy handle increased carbon emissions sixfold, while the cost of handle sterilization exceeded the cost of disposable covers, resulting in 11% higher cost per use. At the other hospital, using a lighter handle increased carbon emissions by 40% per use, while sterilization cost was less than the cost of disposable covers, resulting in 14.8% lower cost per use. Scenario modelling indicated that sterilizing handles as part of a hollowware set rather than as individual items would significantly reduce cost and carbon footprint. At both hospitals, associated clinical waste was essentially eliminated.

Conclusion: Judicious replacement of disposable covers with lightweight yet durable reusable handles can reduce costs, but increases carbon footprint in the current Australian energy context. Adopting predominantly renewable energy and more efficient sterilization practice would mitigate this.