Abstract
Objectives To agree the ‘top 10’ research priorities for environmentally sustainable peri-operative practice.
Design surveys and literature review; final consensus workshop using a nominal group technique. Setting: UK-based.
Participants healthcare professionals, patients, carers, and the public.
Outcome measures initial survey- suggested research questions; interim survey- shortlist of ‘indicative’ questions (the 20 most frequently nominated by patients, carers and the public, and healthcare professionals); final workshop- ranked research priorities.
Results initial survey- 1,926 suggestions by 296 respondents, refined into 60 indicative questions. Interim survey- 325 respondents. Final workshop- 21 participants agreed the ‘top 10’:
How can more sustainable reusable equipment safely be used during and around the time of an operation?
How can healthcare organisations more sustainably procure (obtain) medicines, equipment and items used during and around the time of an operation?
How can healthcare professionals who deliver care during and around the time of an operation be encouraged to adopt sustainable actions in practice?
Can more efficient use of operating theatres and associated practices reduce the environmental impact of operations?
How can the amount of waste generated during and around the time of an operation be minimised?
How do we measure and compare the short- and long-term environmental impacts of surgical and non-surgical treatments for the same condition?
What is the environmental impact of different anaesthetic techniques (e.g., different types of general, regional and local anaesthesia) used for the same operation?
How should the environmental impact of an operation be weighed against its clinical outcomes and financial costs?
How can environmental sustainability be incorporated into the organisational management of operating theatres?
What are the most sustainable forms of effective infection prevention and control used around the time of an operation (e.g., PPE, drapes, clean air ventilation)?
Conclusions a broad range of ‘end-users’ have identified research priorities for sustainable peri-operative care.
Strengths and Limitations of this Study
We have defined the top 10 research priorities according to healthcare professionals, patients, carers, and members of the public, in an important and expanding area of health research.
To our knowledge, this is the first research priority setting partnership in any field of sustainable healthcare.
Patients, carers, and members of the public comprised 21% of survey respondents overall, a smaller proportion than in many priority setting partnerships. This may have been because of the online methods used (due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic) or the novel subject matter.
The James Lind Alliance process is consensus-based, transparent, and includes measures to ensure that patient, carer and public opinions are represented.
The scope of our work was limited to ‘care provided from or in the secondary care setting to patients who may benefit from surgical management’ so does not include the full patient journey; more sustainability-focussed priority setting partnerships would be beneficial in the future.
Original Protocol of the Study See https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/documents/greener-operations-sustainable-peri-operative-practice-psp-protocol/27106
Competing Interest Statement
CS is a co-opted member of the Association of Anaesthetists Environment and Sustainability Committee. He has received travel expenses from the Association of Anaesthetists, the Centre for Sustainable Healthcare and Health Education England to attend professional meetings to speak on sustainable healthcare. He is a member of the SBRI Healthcare Delivering a Net Zero NHS competition funding panel. YH is a co-founder of Green Health Wales. CL is a member of the Health Education England North East and North Cumbria Faculty of Sustainable Healthcare and the Intensive Care Society Sustainability Group. DM has accepted consulting fees from Bausch and Lomb and Nuffield Health, and honoraria for education provided to Wilderness Medical Training. SMK is the chairperson of the Association of Anaesthetists Environment and Sustainability Committee. VP is vice chairperson of the Royal College of Surgeons of England Sustainability in Surgery Group. TR is an independent participant in the OneTogether programme. DJ is the budget holder for account managed within MFT Charity used to fund Greener Operations. The other authors have no competing interests to declare.
Clinical Protocols
Funding Statement
This work was supported by a grant from the Manchester Foundation Trust (MFT) Charity
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This (UK based) James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership did not require ethics approval as it is a form of public involvement in research. Please see the James Lind Alliance guidebook for further details: https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/jla-guidebook/chapter-5/consent-and-ethics.htm
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Joint first authors
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
