Potential impacts to human health from climate change: A comparative life-cycle assessment of single-use versus reusable devices flexible ureteroscopes.
Marlene Thöne, Jan Lask, Jörg Hennenlotter, Matthias Saar, Igor Tsaur, Arnulf Stenzl, Steffen Rausch
{"title":"Potential impacts to human health from climate change: A comparative life-cycle assessment of single-use versus reusable devices flexible ureteroscopes.","authors":"Marlene Thöne, Jan Lask, Jörg Hennenlotter, Matthias Saar, Igor Tsaur, Arnulf Stenzl, Steffen Rausch","doi":"10.1007/s00240-024-01664-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Climate change poses a significant global health challenge, with medical procedures contributing substantially to CO<sub>2</sub> emissions. Urology, as part of the broader healthcare sector, has begun integrating Planetary Health concepts to address this issue. While earlier studies have focused on Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) of urological procedures, these evaluations remain data-dependent, and insights into intra-hospital emissions are limited. This study introduces a methodical approach for analyzing intra-institutional processes of LCA for single-use and reusable flexible ureterorenoscopes (fURS). The LCA method was applied to assess the greenhouse gas emissions (CO<sub>2</sub> equivalents, CO<sub>2</sub>-eq) generated across the life cycle of fURS, including production, use-phase, reprocessing, maintenance, and disposal. The study approximated the Global Warming Potential (GWP) per one-hour use and evaluated associated health impacts using the ReCiPe2016(H) method, which measures Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). Results showed that for reusable fURS, assuming 133 usages per device and maintenance after every 11th use, each application generated 1.24 kg CO<sub>2</sub>-eq, equivalent to 1.15E-06 DALYs. In contrast, single-use fURS generated 4.93 kg CO<sub>2</sub>-eq and 4.57E-06 DALYs per application. The production and reprocessing stages were identified as having the greatest environmental and health impacts. For reusable fURS, electricity required during refurbishment and use phases was a key contributor, whereas the production phase accounted for most of the impact in single-use devices. Overall, singleuse fURS had a substantially higher potential environmental and health impact than their reusable counterparts. This study underscores the environmental and health impacts of ureterorenoscopy and highlights the importance of incorporating Planetary Health principles into healthcare practices. It provides a foundation for further analyses and research, aiming to drive transformative action in the healthcare sector toward sustainability.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"52 1","pages":"166"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urolithiasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01664-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Climate change poses a significant global health challenge, with medical procedures contributing substantially to CO2 emissions. Urology, as part of the broader healthcare sector, has begun integrating Planetary Health concepts to address this issue. While earlier studies have focused on Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) of urological procedures, these evaluations remain data-dependent, and insights into intra-hospital emissions are limited. This study introduces a methodical approach for analyzing intra-institutional processes of LCA for single-use and reusable flexible ureterorenoscopes (fURS). The LCA method was applied to assess the greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalents, CO2-eq) generated across the life cycle of fURS, including production, use-phase, reprocessing, maintenance, and disposal. The study approximated the Global Warming Potential (GWP) per one-hour use and evaluated associated health impacts using the ReCiPe2016(H) method, which measures Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). Results showed that for reusable fURS, assuming 133 usages per device and maintenance after every 11th use, each application generated 1.24 kg CO2-eq, equivalent to 1.15E-06 DALYs. In contrast, single-use fURS generated 4.93 kg CO2-eq and 4.57E-06 DALYs per application. The production and reprocessing stages were identified as having the greatest environmental and health impacts. For reusable fURS, electricity required during refurbishment and use phases was a key contributor, whereas the production phase accounted for most of the impact in single-use devices. Overall, singleuse fURS had a substantially higher potential environmental and health impact than their reusable counterparts. This study underscores the environmental and health impacts of ureterorenoscopy and highlights the importance of incorporating Planetary Health principles into healthcare practices. It provides a foundation for further analyses and research, aiming to drive transformative action in the healthcare sector toward sustainability.
期刊介绍:
Official Journal of the International Urolithiasis Society
The journal aims to publish original articles in the fields of clinical and experimental investigation only within the sphere of urolithiasis and its related areas of research. The journal covers all aspects of urolithiasis research including the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical biochemistry, open and non-invasive surgical intervention, nephrological investigation, chemistry and prophylaxis of the disorder. The Editor welcomes contributions on topics of interest to urologists, nephrologists, radiologists, clinical biochemists, epidemiologists, nutritionists, basic scientists and nurses working in that field.
Contributions may be submitted as full-length articles or as rapid communications in the form of Letters to the Editor. Articles should be original and should contain important new findings from carefully conducted studies designed to produce statistically significant data. Please note that we no longer publish articles classified as Case Reports. Editorials and review articles may be published by invitation from the Editorial Board. All submissions are peer-reviewed. Through an electronic system for the submission and review of manuscripts, the Editor and Associate Editors aim to make publication accessible as quickly as possible to a large number of readers throughout the world.