Environmental Impact of Adult Tonsillectomy: Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Comparison of Techniques.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify and compare the cost and environmental impact of different techniques for adult tonsillectomy surgery, and to identify target areas for impact reduction. METHODS: Fifteen consecutive adult tonsillectomy surgeries were prospectively randomized to one of three tonsillectomy techniques: cold, monopolar electrocautery, or low-temperature radiofrequency ablation (Coblation). Life cycle assessment was used to comprehensively evaluate the environmental impact of study surgeries. Outcomes assessed included multiple measures of environmental impact, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and cost. Environmental impact measures were analyzed to identify highest-yield areas for improvement, and outcomes were compared between surgical techniques using statistical analysis. RESULTS: GHG emissions for cold, monopolar electrocautery, and Coblation techniques were 157.6, 184.5, and 204.7 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents (kgCO2 -eq) per surgery, respectively, with costs totaling $472.51, $619.10, and $715.53 per surgery, respectively. Regardless of surgery technique, anesthesia medications and disposable equipment contributed most to environmental harm. Cold technique demonstrated reduced environmental impact related to disposable surgical equipment in the categories of greenhouse gas emissions, acidification of soil and water, eutrophication of air, ozone depletion, release of carcinogenic, and non-carcinogenic toxic substances, and respiratory pollutant production (p < 0.05 for all comparisons with other techniques). CONCLUSION: Within the boundaries of operating room processes, cold technique minimizes cost and environmental impact of adult tonsillectomy surgery, with statistical significance noted in the impact of disposable surgical equipment. Areas of highest potential for improvement identified include reducing use of disposable equipment and collaboration with the Anesthesiology care team to streamline medication use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2, randomized trial Laryngoscope, 134:622-628, 2024.

The environmental impact of surgical telemedicine: life cycle assessment of virtual vs. in-person preoperative evaluations for benign foregut disease.

BACKGROUND: Health care accounts for almost 10% of the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for a loss of 470,000 disability-adjusted life years based on the health effects of climate change. Telemedicine has the potential to decrease health care's carbon footprint by reducing patient travel and clinic-related emissions. At our institution, telemedicine visits for evaluation of benign foregut disease were implemented for patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the environmental impact of telemedicine usage for these clinic encounters. METHODS: We used life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for an in-person and a telemedicine visit. For in-person visits, travel distances to clinic were retrospectively assessed from 2020 visits as a representative sample, and prospective data were gathered on materials and processes related to in-person clinic visits. Prospective data on the length of telemedicine encounters were collected and environmental impact was calculated for equipment and internet usage. Upper and lower bounds scenarios for emissions were generated for each type of visit. RESULTS: For in-person visits, 145 patient travel distances were recorded with a median [IQR] distance travel distance of 29.5 [13.7, 85.1] miles resulting in 38.22-39.61 carbon dioxide equivalents (kgCO2-eq) emitted. For telemedicine visits, the mean (SD) visit time was 40.6 (17.1) min. Telemedicine GHG emissions ranged from 2.26 to 2.99 kgCO2-eq depending on the device used. An in-person visit resulted in 25 times more GHG emissions compared to a telemedicine visit (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Telemedicine has the potential to decrease health care's carbon footprint. Policy changes to facilitate telemedicine use are needed, as well as increased awareness of potential disparities of and barriers to telemedicine use. Moving toward telemedicine preoperative evaluations in appropriate surgical populations is a purposeful step toward actively addressing our role in health care's large carbon footprint.