创伤外科的碳足迹,有办法减少吗?

Elize W Lockhorst, Philip M J Schormans, Cornelis A S Berende, Pieter Boele van Hensbroek, Dagmar I Vos
{"title":"创伤外科的碳足迹,有办法减少吗?","authors":"Elize W Lockhorst, Philip M J Schormans, Cornelis A S Berende, Pieter Boele van Hensbroek, Dagmar I Vos","doi":"10.1186/s44158-024-00181-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inhaled anaesthetic agents like sevoflurane contribute for approximately 5% to healthcare's carbon footprint. Previous studies suggested that the use of these agents should be minimized. Although multiple trauma surgeries can be performed under regional anaesthesia, most are performed under general anaesthesia. This study aims to evaluate the environmental benefits of using regional anaesthesia over general anaesthesia and to compare the associated complication rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included all trauma patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent surgical intervention for hand, wrist, hip, or ankle fractures from 2017 to 2021. The hypothetical environmental gain was calculated based on the assumption that all surgeries were performed under regional anaesthesia. Complication rates were compared between regional and general anaesthesia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 2,714 surgeries, 15% were hand, 26% wrist, 36% hip, and 23% ankle fractures. General anaesthesia was used in 95%, regional in 5%. Switching this 95% to regional anaesthesia would reduce the sevoflurane use by 92 k, comparable to driving 406,553 km by car. The complication rate was higher with general anaesthesia compared to regional (7.7% vs 6.9%, p = 0.75).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The potential gain of the reduction of sevoflurane in trauma surgeries which can be performed under regional anaesthesia can be significant.</p>","PeriodicalId":73597,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11256432/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carbon footprint in trauma surgery, is there a way to reduce it?\",\"authors\":\"Elize W Lockhorst, Philip M J Schormans, Cornelis A S Berende, Pieter Boele van Hensbroek, Dagmar I Vos\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s44158-024-00181-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inhaled anaesthetic agents like sevoflurane contribute for approximately 5% to healthcare's carbon footprint. Previous studies suggested that the use of these agents should be minimized. Although multiple trauma surgeries can be performed under regional anaesthesia, most are performed under general anaesthesia. This study aims to evaluate the environmental benefits of using regional anaesthesia over general anaesthesia and to compare the associated complication rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included all trauma patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent surgical intervention for hand, wrist, hip, or ankle fractures from 2017 to 2021. The hypothetical environmental gain was calculated based on the assumption that all surgeries were performed under regional anaesthesia. Complication rates were compared between regional and general anaesthesia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 2,714 surgeries, 15% were hand, 26% wrist, 36% hip, and 23% ankle fractures. General anaesthesia was used in 95%, regional in 5%. Switching this 95% to regional anaesthesia would reduce the sevoflurane use by 92 k, comparable to driving 406,553 km by car. The complication rate was higher with general anaesthesia compared to regional (7.7% vs 6.9%, p = 0.75).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The potential gain of the reduction of sevoflurane in trauma surgeries which can be performed under regional anaesthesia can be significant.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11256432/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-024-00181-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-024-00181-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:七氟醚等吸入式麻醉剂约占医疗碳足迹的 5%。以往的研究表明,应尽量减少这些麻醉剂的使用。尽管多种创伤手术可在区域麻醉下进行,但大多数手术都是在全身麻醉下进行的。本研究旨在评估使用区域麻醉比使用全身麻醉的环境效益,并比较相关的并发症发生率:这项回顾性研究纳入了2017年至2021年期间因手、腕、髋或踝骨骨折接受手术治疗的所有创伤患者(≥18岁)。假设所有手术均在区域麻醉下进行,并据此计算出假设环境收益。比较了区域麻醉和全身麻醉的并发症发生率:在 2714 例手术中,15% 为手部骨折,26% 为腕部骨折,36% 为髋部骨折,23% 为踝部骨折。95%的手术使用了全身麻醉,5%的手术使用了区域麻醉。如果这95%的手术改用区域麻醉,七氟醚的使用量将减少92千卡,相当于汽车行驶406553公里。与区域麻醉相比,全身麻醉的并发症发生率更高(7.7% 对 6.9%,P = 0.75):结论:在可进行区域麻醉的创伤手术中减少七氟醚的使用可能会带来巨大收益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Carbon footprint in trauma surgery, is there a way to reduce it?

Background: Inhaled anaesthetic agents like sevoflurane contribute for approximately 5% to healthcare's carbon footprint. Previous studies suggested that the use of these agents should be minimized. Although multiple trauma surgeries can be performed under regional anaesthesia, most are performed under general anaesthesia. This study aims to evaluate the environmental benefits of using regional anaesthesia over general anaesthesia and to compare the associated complication rates.

Methods: This retrospective study included all trauma patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent surgical intervention for hand, wrist, hip, or ankle fractures from 2017 to 2021. The hypothetical environmental gain was calculated based on the assumption that all surgeries were performed under regional anaesthesia. Complication rates were compared between regional and general anaesthesia.

Results: Of the 2,714 surgeries, 15% were hand, 26% wrist, 36% hip, and 23% ankle fractures. General anaesthesia was used in 95%, regional in 5%. Switching this 95% to regional anaesthesia would reduce the sevoflurane use by 92 k, comparable to driving 406,553 km by car. The complication rate was higher with general anaesthesia compared to regional (7.7% vs 6.9%, p = 0.75).

Conclusion: The potential gain of the reduction of sevoflurane in trauma surgeries which can be performed under regional anaesthesia can be significant.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Opioid system and related ligands: from the past to future perspectives. Abstracts of the ICARE 2024 78th SIAARTI National Congress. Lung ultrasound assessment of atelectasis following different anesthesia induction techniques in pediatric patients: a propensity score-matched, observational study. Management of analgosedation during noninvasive respiratory support: an expert Delphi consensus document developed by the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI). Neuropathic pain, antidepressant drugs, and inflammation: a narrative review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1