ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Anaesthesia contributes substantially to the environmental impact of healthcare. To reduce the ecological footprint of anaesthesia, a set of sustainability interventions was implemented in the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. This study evaluates the environmental and economic implications of these interventions. METHODS: This was a single-centre retrospective observational study. We analysed the environmental impact and financial implications of changes in sevoflurane, desflurane, propofol, and plastic consumption over 2 yr (April 2021 to March 2023). The study included pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation phases. RESULTS: After implementation of sustainability measures, desflurane use was eliminated, there was a decrease in the consumption of sevoflurane from a median (inter-quartile range) of 25 (14-39) ml per case to 11 (6-22) ml per case (P<0.0001). Propofol consumption increased from 250 (150-721) mg per case to 743 (370-1284) mg per case (P<0.0001). Use of plastics changed: in the first quarter analysed, two or more infusion syringes were used in 62% of cases, compared with 74% of cases in the last quarter (P<0.0001). Two or more infusion lines were used in 58% of cases in the first quarter analysed, compared with 68% of cases in the last quarter (P<0.0001). This resulted in an 81% reduction in overall environmental impact from 3 (0-7) to 1 (0-3) CO2 equivalents in kg per case (P<0.0001). The costs during the final study phase were 11% lower compared with those in the initial phase: from 25 (13-41) to 21 (14-31) CHF (Swiss francs) per case (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing sustainable anaesthesia interventions can significantly reduce the environmental impact and cost of anaesthesia.
Subject(s)
Anxiety , Tachycardia , Adolescent , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/etiology , Electrocardiography , Humans , Male , Tachycardia/diagnosis , Tachycardia/etiologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Reliable platelet function monitoring is desirable in patients treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors. The aim of the present laboratory-based study was to assess platelet function after administration of clinically relevant doses of the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist tirofiban with or without heparin by using Sonoclot (Sienco Inc) and platelet aggregometry. METHODS: Tirofiban (0-100 ng x mL(-1)) and heparin (0 or 1 U x mL(-1)) were added to blood samples obtained from 20 healthy volunteers. Coagulation analysis was performed on citrated whole blood by using the Sonoclot analyzer. The glass bead-activated test and the new glass bead test with heparinase were used. The results were compared with adenosine-5'-diphosphate-activated platelet aggregometry. RESULTS: Administration of tirofiban showed a similar increase of platelet inhibition detected with the Sonoclot glass bead-activated test and glass bead test with heparinase, as well as by means of aggregometry. Bias between the different techniques was comparable; Spearman rank correlation was strong (glass bead-activated test vs aggregometry: rho = 0.823, P < .001; glass bead test with heparinase vs aggregometry: rho = 0.856, P < .001). After additional administration of heparin, platelet inhibition was only comparable for the glass bead test with heparinase and aggregometry, and the correlation coefficient remained unchanged for the glass bead test with heparinase versus aggregometry (rho = 0.878, P < .001). By contrast, the glass bead-activated test showed a nearly complete platelet inhibition with a significant bias compared with the glass bead test with heparinase and aggregometry. Correlation was weak for the glass bead-activated test versus aggregometry (rho = 0.407, P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: When compared with platelet aggregometry, the glass bead-activated test from Sonoclot reliably detects glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibition with tirofiban in unheparinized whole blood. However, in heparinized blood the glass bead test with heparinase is essential to accurately assess platelet function.
