Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-2240-9414
Perspectives and awareness of endoscopy healthcare professionals on sustainable practices in gastrointestinal endoscopy: results of the LEAFGREEN survey
Abstract
Background Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is one of healthcare’s main contributors to climate change. We aimed to assess healthcare professionals’ attitudes and the perceived barriers to implementation of sustainable GI endoscopy.
Methods The LEAFGREEN web-based survey was a cross-sectional study conducted by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Green Endoscopy Working Group. The questionnaire comprised 39 questions divided into five sections (respondent demographics; climate change and sustainability beliefs; waste and resource management; single-use endoscopes and accessories; education and research). The survey was available via email to all active members of the ESGE and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) in March 2023.
Results 407 respondents participated in the survey (11% response rate). Most participants (86%) agreed climate change is real and anthropogenic, but one-third did not consider GI endoscopy to be a significant contributor to climate change. Improvement in the appropriateness of endoscopic procedures (41%) and reduction in single-use accessories (34%) were considered the most important strategies to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. Respondents deemed lack of institutional support and knowledge from staff to be the main barriers to sustainable endoscopy. Strategies to reduce unnecessary GI endoscopic procedures and comparative studies of single-use versus reusable accessories were identified as research priorities.
Conclusions In this survey, ESGE and ESGENA members acknowledge climate change as a major threat to humanity. Further improvement in sustainability beliefs and professional attitudes, reduction in inappropriate GI endoscopy, and rational use of single-use accessories and endoscopes are critically required.
Publication History
Received: 19 July 2023
Accepted after revision: 07 December 2023
Article published online:
26 January 2024
© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Siau K, Hayee BH, Gayam S. Endoscopy's current carbon footprint. Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 23: 344-352
- 2 Maurice JB, Siau K, Sebastian S. et al. Green endoscopy: a call for sustainability in the midst of COVID-19. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 5: 636-638 DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30157-6. (PMID: 32553141)
- 3 Siddhi S, Dhar A, Sebastian S. Best practices in environmental advocacy and research in endoscopy. Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 23: 376-384
- 4 Rodríguez de Santiago E, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Pohl H. et al. Reducing the environmental footprint of gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2022; 54: 797-826
- 5 Agrawal D, Shoup V, Montgomery A. et al. Disposal of endoscopic accessories after use: do we know and do we care?. Gastroenterol Nurs 2017; 40: 13-18 DOI: 10.1097/SGA.0000000000000280. (PMID: 28134715)
- 6 de Melo Jr SW, Taylor GL, Kao JY. Packaging and waste in the endoscopy suite. Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 23: 371-375
- 7 Cunha Neves JA, Roseira J, Queirós P. et al. Targeted intervention to achieve waste reduction in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gut 2023; 72: 306-313
- 8 Leddin D, Omary MB, Metz G. et al. Climate change: a survey of global gastroenterology society leadership. Gut 2022; 71: 1929-1932 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327832. (PMID: 35688613)
- 9 Sharma A, Minh Duc NT, Luu Lam Thang T. et al. A consensus-based checklist for reporting of survey studies (CROSS). J Gen Int Med 2021; 36: 3179-3187
- 10 Lacroute J, Marcantoni J, Petitot S. et al. The carbon footprint of ambulatory gastrointestinal endoscopy. Endoscopy 2023; 5: 918-926 DOI: 10.1055/a-2088-4062. (PMID: 37156511)
- 11 Health professionals call for Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to protect lives of current and future generations. Accessed December 19, 2023 at: https://fossilfueltreaty.org/health-letter
- 12 Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pirani A. et al. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2021: Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2023: 3-32
- 13 Citizen support for climate action. Accessed December 19, 2023 at: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/citizens/citizen-support-climate-action_en#ref-2021-survey
- 14 Sarfaty M, Bloodhart B, Ewart G. et al. American Thoracic Society member survey on climate change and health. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2015; 12: 274-278 DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201410-460BC. (PMID: 25535822)
- 15 Bortoluzzi F, Sorge A, Vassallo R. et al. Sustainability in gastroenterology and digestive endoscopy: Position Paper from the Italian association of hospital gastroenterologists and digestive endoscopists (AIGO). Dig Liver Dis 2022; 54: 1623-1629
- 16 Cunha MF, Pellino G. Environmental effects of surgical procedures and strategies for sustainable surgery. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 20: 399-410 DOI: 10.1038/s41575-022-00716-5. (PMID: 36481812)
- 17 Cunha Neves JA, Roseira J, Cunha MF. et al. Towards a greener endoscopy: Considerations on the strategies to improve sustainability. Dig Liver Dis 2023; 55: 429-430
- 18 Sebastian S, Dhar A, Baddeley R. et al. Green endoscopy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), Joint Accreditation Group (JAG) and Centre for Sustainable Health (CSH) joint consensus on practical measures for environmental sustainability in endoscopy. Gut 2023; 72: 12-26 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-328460. (PMID: 36229172)
- 19 Sheffield KM, Han Y, Kuo YF. et al. Potentially inappropriate screening colonoscopy in Medicare patients: variation by physician and geographic region. JAMA Int Med 2013; 173: 542-550 DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.2912. (PMID: 23478992)
- 20 de Jong JJ, Lantinga MA, Drenth JP. Prevention of overuse: A view on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25: 178-189 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i2.178. (PMID: 30670908)
- 21 Namburar S, von Renteln D, Damianos J. et al. Estimating the environmental impact of disposable endoscopic equipment and endoscopes. Gut 2022; 71: 1326-1331
- 22 Gayam S. Environmental impact of endoscopy: "scope" of the problem. Am J Gastroenterol 2020; 115: 1931-1932 DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001005. (PMID: 33086225)
- 23 Haddock R, Gopfert A, van Hove M. et al. The case for sustainable endoscopy as a professional priority. Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 23: 337-343
- 24 Arup and Health Care Without Harm. Healthcare’s climate footprint. Accessed April 15, 2023 at: https://www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/healthcares-climate-footprint
- 25 Calderwood AH, Chapman FJ, Cohen J. et al. Guidelines for safety in the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: 363-372 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.12.015. (PMID: 24485393)
- 26 Rauwers AW, Voor In 't Holt AF, Buijs JG. et al. High prevalence rate of digestive tract bacteria in duodenoscopes: a nationwide study. Gut 2018; 67: 1637-1645
- 27 US Food and Drug Administration. The FDA continues to remind facilities of the importance of following duodenoscope reprocessing instructions: FDA safety communication. 2019 Accessed December 19, 2023 at: https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20201222112113/https:/www.fda.gov/medical-devices/safety-communications/fda-continues-remind-facilities-importance-following-duodenoscope-reprocessing-instructions-fda
- 28 Le NNT, Hernandez LV, Vakil N. et al. Environmental and health outcomes of single-use versus reusable duodenoscopes. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96: 1002-1008 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.06.014. (PMID: 35718068)
- 29 Ponchon T, Pioche M. Reprocessing single-use devices: A new season in a long-running show? A European perspective. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 1195-1197
- 30 Fang L, Pinder A, Cooper G. et al. Mitigating the environmental impact of plastic PPE: more than just disposal. BMJ 2021; 372: n752
- 31 López-Muñoz P, Martín-Cabezuelo R, Lorenzo-Zúñiga V. et al. Life cycle assessment of routinely used endoscopic instruments and simple intervention to reduce our environmental impact. Gut 2023; 72: 1692-1697 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2023-329544. (PMID: 37185655)
- 32 Tao Y, Steckel D, Klemeš JJ. et al. Trend towards virtual and hybrid conferences may be an effective climate change mitigation strategy. Nat Commun 2021; 12: 7324 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-27251-2. (PMID: 34916499)
- 33 An N, Huang C, Shen Y. et al. Challenges of carbon emission reduction by the workshop education pattern. Heliyon 2023; 9: e13404 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13404. (PMID: 36789384)
- 34 Kotcher J, Maibach E, Miller J. et al. Views of health professionals on climate change and health: a multinational survey study. Lancet Planet Health 2021; 5: e316-e323 DOI: 10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00053-X. (PMID: 33838130)
- 35 Sarfaty M, Kreslake J, Ewart G. et al. Survey of international members of the American Thoracic Society on climate change and health. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2016; 13: 1808-1813 DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201604-229BC. (PMID: 27726439)