期刊
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 33, 期 1, 页码 56-63出版社
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckac174
关键词
-
This study conducted a systematic review of comparative life-cycle assessments (LCAs) to assess the environmental effects of replacing single-use healthcare products with reusable ones. The results showed that switching to reusable products could reduce most environmental impacts except for water use.
Background Replacing single-use products with reusable ones may reduce the environmental impact of healthcare. This study aimed to broadly assess the environmental effects of that substitution. Methods A systematic review of comparative cradle-to-grave life-cycle assessments (LCAs) of single-use and reusable healthcare products was conducted. The main outcomes assessed were changes in the environmental impact that resulted after switching from single-use to reusable products. As no standardized transparency checklist was available, one was developed here using DIN ISO 14040/14044. The final checklist included 22 criteria used to appraise the included studies. Results After screening, 27 studies were included in the analysis. The healthcare products were assigned to four categories: invasive medical devices, non-invasive medical devices, protection equipment and inhalers. The outcomes revealed a reduction in mean effect sizes for all environmental impacts except water use. Non-invasive medical devices have greater relative mitigation potential than invasive devices. On average, information on 64% of the transparency checklist items was reported. Gaps included the reporting of data quality requirements. Conclusions Switching to reusable healthcare products is likely to reduce most impacts on the environment except water use, but the effect size differs among product categories. Possible study limitations include location bias, no systematic search of the grey literature and small samples for some impacts. This study's strengths are its approach to product categories and developed transparency catalogue. This catalogue could be useful to inform and guide a future process towards creating a standardized transparency checklist for the systematic reviews of LCAs.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据