Methods and evaluation metrics for reducing material waste in the operating room: a scoping review

Operating rooms contribute up to 70% of total hospital waste. Although multiple studies have demonstrated reduced waste through targeted interventions, few examine processes. This scoping review highlights methods of study design, outcome assessment, and sustainability practices of operating room wa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Surgery 2023-08, Vol.174 (2), p.252-258
Hauptverfasser: Balch, Jeremy A., Krebs, Jonathan R., Filiberto, Amanda C., Montgomery, William G., Berkow, Lauren C., Upchurch, Gilbert R., Loftus, Tyler J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 258
container_issue 2
container_start_page 252
container_title Surgery
container_volume 174
creator Balch, Jeremy A.
Krebs, Jonathan R.
Filiberto, Amanda C.
Montgomery, William G.
Berkow, Lauren C.
Upchurch, Gilbert R.
Loftus, Tyler J.
description Operating rooms contribute up to 70% of total hospital waste. Although multiple studies have demonstrated reduced waste through targeted interventions, few examine processes. This scoping review highlights methods of study design, outcome assessment, and sustainability practices of operating room waste reduction strategies employed by surgeons. Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were screened for operating room-specific waste-reduction interventions. Waste was defined as hazardous and non-hazardous disposable material and energy consumption. Study-specific elements were tabulated by study design, evaluation metrics, strengths, limitations, and barriers to implementation in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A total of 38 articles were analyzed. Among them, 74% of studies had pre- versus postintervention designs, and 21% used quality improvement instruments. No studies used an implementation framework. The vast majority (92%) of studies measured cost as an outcome, whereas others included disposable waste by weight, hospital energy consumption, and stakeholder perspectives. The most common intervention was instrument tray optimization. Common barriers to implementation included lack of stakeholder buy-in, knowledge gaps, data capture, additional staff time, need for hospital or federal policies, and funding. Intervention sustainability was discussed in few studies (23%) and included regular waste audits, hospital policy change, and educational initiatives. Common methodologic limitations included limited outcome evaluation, narrow scope of intervention, and inability to capture indirect costs. Appraisal of quality improvement and implementation methods are critical for developing sustainable interventions for reducing operating room waste. Universal evaluation metrics and methodologies may aid in both quantifying the impact of waste reduction initiatives and understanding their implementation in clinical practice.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.051
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2823039914</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S003960602300257X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2823039914</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-af6eccfba8316d072aba696a7144e29ddcaaee5f7ad8a255755f28e78d693903</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1v1DAQhi0EokvhD3BAPnJJGNuJnSAuqOJLKuLSuzVrT1qvknixnVb8e7xs4chpNJrnfaV5GHstoBUg9LtDm7d020qQqoWuhV48YTvRK9kYpcVTtgNQY6NBwwV7kfMBAMZODM_ZhTLSGAXDju2_U7mLPnNcPad7nDcsIa58oZKCy3yKiSfymwvrLV-wUAo48wfMhXhYebkjHo-UaqjeU4zLe448u3j8s9N9oIeX7NmEc6ZXj_OS3Xz-dHP1tbn-8eXb1cfrxikwpcFJk3PTHgcltAcjcY961GhE15EcvXeIRP1k0A8o-970_SQHMoPXoxpBXbK359pjij83ysUuITuaZ1wpbtnKQarqYxRdReUZdSnmnGiyxxQWTL-sAHtSaw_2pNae1FrobFVbQ28e-7f9Qv5f5K_LCnw4A1SfrI8nm12g1ZEPiVyxPob_9f8GY-mMWA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2823039914</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Methods and evaluation metrics for reducing material waste in the operating room: a scoping review</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Balch, Jeremy A. ; Krebs, Jonathan R. ; Filiberto, Amanda C. ; Montgomery, William G. ; Berkow, Lauren C. ; Upchurch, Gilbert R. ; Loftus, Tyler J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Balch, Jeremy A. ; Krebs, Jonathan R. ; Filiberto, Amanda C. ; Montgomery, William G. ; Berkow, Lauren C. ; Upchurch, Gilbert R. ; Loftus, Tyler J.</creatorcontrib><description>Operating rooms contribute up to 70% of total hospital waste. Although multiple studies have demonstrated reduced waste through targeted interventions, few examine processes. This scoping review highlights methods of study design, outcome assessment, and sustainability practices of operating room waste reduction strategies employed by surgeons. Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were screened for operating room-specific waste-reduction interventions. Waste was defined as hazardous and non-hazardous disposable material and energy consumption. Study-specific elements were tabulated by study design, evaluation metrics, strengths, limitations, and barriers to implementation in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A total of 38 articles were analyzed. Among them, 74% of studies had pre- versus postintervention designs, and 21% used quality improvement instruments. No studies used an implementation framework. The vast majority (92%) of studies measured cost as an outcome, whereas others included disposable waste by weight, hospital energy consumption, and stakeholder perspectives. The most common intervention was instrument tray optimization. Common barriers to implementation included lack of stakeholder buy-in, knowledge gaps, data capture, additional staff time, need for hospital or federal policies, and funding. Intervention sustainability was discussed in few studies (23%) and included regular waste audits, hospital policy change, and educational initiatives. Common methodologic limitations included limited outcome evaluation, narrow scope of intervention, and inability to capture indirect costs. Appraisal of quality improvement and implementation methods are critical for developing sustainable interventions for reducing operating room waste. Universal evaluation metrics and methodologies may aid in both quantifying the impact of waste reduction initiatives and understanding their implementation in clinical practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0039-6060</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-7361</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.051</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37277308</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><ispartof>Surgery, 2023-08, Vol.174 (2), p.252-258</ispartof><rights>2023 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-af6eccfba8316d072aba696a7144e29ddcaaee5f7ad8a255755f28e78d693903</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1956-9988 ; 0000-0003-3586-8830 ; 0000-0001-5354-443X ; 0000-0002-4679-8623 ; 0000-0002-1826-7884</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.051$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37277308$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Balch, Jeremy A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krebs, Jonathan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filiberto, Amanda C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montgomery, William G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkow, Lauren C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Upchurch, Gilbert R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loftus, Tyler J.</creatorcontrib><title>Methods and evaluation metrics for reducing material waste in the operating room: a scoping review</title><title>Surgery</title><addtitle>Surgery</addtitle><description>Operating rooms contribute up to 70% of total hospital waste. Although multiple studies have demonstrated reduced waste through targeted interventions, few examine processes. This scoping review highlights methods of study design, outcome assessment, and sustainability practices of operating room waste reduction strategies employed by surgeons. Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were screened for operating room-specific waste-reduction interventions. Waste was defined as hazardous and non-hazardous disposable material and energy consumption. Study-specific elements were tabulated by study design, evaluation metrics, strengths, limitations, and barriers to implementation in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A total of 38 articles were analyzed. Among them, 74% of studies had pre- versus postintervention designs, and 21% used quality improvement instruments. No studies used an implementation framework. The vast majority (92%) of studies measured cost as an outcome, whereas others included disposable waste by weight, hospital energy consumption, and stakeholder perspectives. The most common intervention was instrument tray optimization. Common barriers to implementation included lack of stakeholder buy-in, knowledge gaps, data capture, additional staff time, need for hospital or federal policies, and funding. Intervention sustainability was discussed in few studies (23%) and included regular waste audits, hospital policy change, and educational initiatives. Common methodologic limitations included limited outcome evaluation, narrow scope of intervention, and inability to capture indirect costs. Appraisal of quality improvement and implementation methods are critical for developing sustainable interventions for reducing operating room waste. Universal evaluation metrics and methodologies may aid in both quantifying the impact of waste reduction initiatives and understanding their implementation in clinical practice.</description><issn>0039-6060</issn><issn>1532-7361</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1v1DAQhi0EokvhD3BAPnJJGNuJnSAuqOJLKuLSuzVrT1qvknixnVb8e7xs4chpNJrnfaV5GHstoBUg9LtDm7d020qQqoWuhV48YTvRK9kYpcVTtgNQY6NBwwV7kfMBAMZODM_ZhTLSGAXDju2_U7mLPnNcPad7nDcsIa58oZKCy3yKiSfymwvrLV-wUAo48wfMhXhYebkjHo-UaqjeU4zLe448u3j8s9N9oIeX7NmEc6ZXj_OS3Xz-dHP1tbn-8eXb1cfrxikwpcFJk3PTHgcltAcjcY961GhE15EcvXeIRP1k0A8o-970_SQHMoPXoxpBXbK359pjij83ysUuITuaZ1wpbtnKQarqYxRdReUZdSnmnGiyxxQWTL-sAHtSaw_2pNae1FrobFVbQ28e-7f9Qv5f5K_LCnw4A1SfrI8nm12g1ZEPiVyxPob_9f8GY-mMWA</recordid><startdate>202308</startdate><enddate>202308</enddate><creator>Balch, Jeremy A.</creator><creator>Krebs, Jonathan R.</creator><creator>Filiberto, Amanda C.</creator><creator>Montgomery, William G.</creator><creator>Berkow, Lauren C.</creator><creator>Upchurch, Gilbert R.</creator><creator>Loftus, Tyler J.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1956-9988</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3586-8830</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5354-443X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4679-8623</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1826-7884</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202308</creationdate><title>Methods and evaluation metrics for reducing material waste in the operating room: a scoping review</title><author>Balch, Jeremy A. ; Krebs, Jonathan R. ; Filiberto, Amanda C. ; Montgomery, William G. ; Berkow, Lauren C. ; Upchurch, Gilbert R. ; Loftus, Tyler J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-af6eccfba8316d072aba696a7144e29ddcaaee5f7ad8a255755f28e78d693903</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Balch, Jeremy A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krebs, Jonathan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filiberto, Amanda C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montgomery, William G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkow, Lauren C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Upchurch, Gilbert R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loftus, Tyler J.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Balch, Jeremy A.</au><au>Krebs, Jonathan R.</au><au>Filiberto, Amanda C.</au><au>Montgomery, William G.</au><au>Berkow, Lauren C.</au><au>Upchurch, Gilbert R.</au><au>Loftus, Tyler J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Methods and evaluation metrics for reducing material waste in the operating room: a scoping review</atitle><jtitle>Surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Surgery</addtitle><date>2023-08</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>174</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>252</spage><epage>258</epage><pages>252-258</pages><issn>0039-6060</issn><eissn>1532-7361</eissn><abstract>Operating rooms contribute up to 70% of total hospital waste. Although multiple studies have demonstrated reduced waste through targeted interventions, few examine processes. This scoping review highlights methods of study design, outcome assessment, and sustainability practices of operating room waste reduction strategies employed by surgeons. Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were screened for operating room-specific waste-reduction interventions. Waste was defined as hazardous and non-hazardous disposable material and energy consumption. Study-specific elements were tabulated by study design, evaluation metrics, strengths, limitations, and barriers to implementation in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A total of 38 articles were analyzed. Among them, 74% of studies had pre- versus postintervention designs, and 21% used quality improvement instruments. No studies used an implementation framework. The vast majority (92%) of studies measured cost as an outcome, whereas others included disposable waste by weight, hospital energy consumption, and stakeholder perspectives. The most common intervention was instrument tray optimization. Common barriers to implementation included lack of stakeholder buy-in, knowledge gaps, data capture, additional staff time, need for hospital or federal policies, and funding. Intervention sustainability was discussed in few studies (23%) and included regular waste audits, hospital policy change, and educational initiatives. Common methodologic limitations included limited outcome evaluation, narrow scope of intervention, and inability to capture indirect costs. Appraisal of quality improvement and implementation methods are critical for developing sustainable interventions for reducing operating room waste. Universal evaluation metrics and methodologies may aid in both quantifying the impact of waste reduction initiatives and understanding their implementation in clinical practice.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>37277308</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.051</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1956-9988</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3586-8830</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5354-443X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4679-8623</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1826-7884</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0039-6060
ispartof Surgery, 2023-08, Vol.174 (2), p.252-258
issn 0039-6060
1532-7361
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2823039914
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
title Methods and evaluation metrics for reducing material waste in the operating room: a scoping review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T17%3A43%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Methods%20and%20evaluation%20metrics%20for%20reducing%20material%20waste%20in%20the%20operating%20room:%20a%20scoping%20review&rft.jtitle=Surgery&rft.au=Balch,%20Jeremy%20A.&rft.date=2023-08&rft.volume=174&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=252&rft.epage=258&rft.pages=252-258&rft.issn=0039-6060&rft.eissn=1532-7361&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.051&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2823039914%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2823039914&rft_id=info:pmid/37277308&rft_els_id=S003960602300257X&rfr_iscdi=true