The environmental impact of PPE is large and could be reduced through domestic manufacture, rationalising glove use, using reusables where possible and optimising waste management.
Hence, in settings with frequent use of sharp equipment, open wounds, and mucus membrane exposure, examination gloves should be required. In cases where most pathogens cannot be transmitted through intact skin, the procedure is not seen as an exposure risk, and natural defences form an adequate barrier against transmittable disease, and sanitation of the hands might be an adequate and more ethical consideration for use. We have illustrated some examples to help readers decide when removing gloves for a procedure is appropriate and when it is not.
My research’s purpose was to help fight the global COVID pandemic by helping ethanol producers produce USP grade ethanol as well as study the environmental impacts of producing USP grade ethanol.
We estimate the direct and indirect rebound effects from energy efficiency improvements by UK households. We allow for the capital cost of the improvement, together with the emissions embodied in the relevant equipment. We find rebound effects to be relatively modest, in the range 5–15%. The anticipated shift towards a low carbon electricity system will lead to larger rebound effects.
The Lead Nurse for Infection Prevention and Control and two Lead Practice Educators at Great Ormond Street Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (GOSH) addressed the over-use of non-sterile gloves through education and training. This has improved patient safety and experience and staff are now following evidence-based practice rather than wearing gloves out of habit.
This webinar, the fourth presentation in the “Reusables First” series, explores lessons learned from unsuccessful attempts to implement reusable products in healthcare settings. It highlights challenges such as increased workload, logistical complexity, and difficulty meeting staff needs. Speakers present case studies including reusable metal spoons, zero-waste yogurt containers, and reusable surgical textiles. Across organizations, common barriers included delays, loss of momentum, inconsistent stakeholder buy-in, and the lack of early cost analysis. The session emphasizes that sharing failures is important for helping other sustainability leaders avoid similar pitfalls and improve future implementation of reusable healthcare practices.
To help organizations measure and maximize these benefits, the CASCADES Virtual Care Carbon Accounting Tool (VCCAT) supports the estimation of travel-related carbon and financial impacts associated with virtual and in-person care. Combined with thoughtful implementation strategies, equitable access planning, and sustainable technology practices, virtual care can play a meaningful role in building a lower-carbon healthcare system
This tool will calculate: 1. The total carbon emissions saved from patient travel averted to and from your facility (in metric tonnes of CO2e) 2. The cost savings to patients from patient travel averted to and from your facility, including the cost of transit fare, gas, insurance, vehicle wear and tear, and parking (in Canadian dollars) 3. The total carbon and financial costs of in-person patient visits to and from your facility (in metric tonnes of CO2e) 4. The carbon and cost savings associated with virtual visits at various percentages of total visits (forecasting)
