Cargando…

Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study

BACKGROUND: Ineffective surgical fluid waste management in operating rooms (OR) creates a significant environmental burden, reduces OR efficiency, and adds physical challenges for surgical staff. There is a need for waste management systems that improve OR efficiency, safety, and sustainability. The...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Baker, Sarah, Clark, Julie, Pla, Angels B., Feixas, Eulalia V., Huegel, Julianne, Tariq, Luqman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10473330/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37663714
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MS9.0000000000000934
_version_ 1785100253124362240
author Baker, Sarah
Clark, Julie
Pla, Angels B.
Feixas, Eulalia V.
Huegel, Julianne
Tariq, Luqman
author_facet Baker, Sarah
Clark, Julie
Pla, Angels B.
Feixas, Eulalia V.
Huegel, Julianne
Tariq, Luqman
author_sort Baker, Sarah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Ineffective surgical fluid waste management in operating rooms (OR) creates a significant environmental burden, reduces OR efficiency, and adds physical challenges for surgical staff. There is a need for waste management systems that improve OR efficiency, safety, and sustainability. The GREEN study (Greening operating Rooms in EuropE comparing Neptune vs. canisters) was conducted to compare the impact of two fluid waste management systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 2-arm, nonrandomized, prospective service evaluation of fluid waste extraction was conducted using observational time series and surveys. Fluid waste-related data were collected from routine urologic and orthopedic surgeries across three European hospital sites. The primary endpoint of waste disposal impact was the volume of treated waste after surgery (kilograms) using Stryker’s Neptune device (n=43) or canisters (n=41). The authors hypothesized that the surgical waste volume related to Neptune is less than the waste volume related to canisters. Secondary endpoints included time efficiency, user satisfaction, and staff ergonomics. RESULTS: The total weight of device-related treated waste products was reduced by 98.5% when using Neptune (0.2±0.7 kg) compared with traditional canisters (13.2±16.6 kg; P<0.001). Decreased waste weight also translated to enhanced ergonomic safety for surgical staff, as Neptune reduced surgical fluid weight handled by staff by an average of 34 kg per procedure, a 96% reduction compared to canisters. Furthermore, the use of the Neptune system improved OR efficiency by reducing the number of staff required to manage the fluid suction device (P<0.001) and the time spent disposing of fluid waste (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Stryker’s Neptune waste management system significantly reduces the volume of treated waste per surgery and improves OR efficiency, staff safety, and user satisfaction over the traditional canister system. This is a more eco-responsible approach to OR fluid waste management and could be considered in any healthcare establishment that generates fluid waste.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10473330
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104733302023-09-02 Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study Baker, Sarah Clark, Julie Pla, Angels B. Feixas, Eulalia V. Huegel, Julianne Tariq, Luqman Ann Med Surg (Lond) Original Research BACKGROUND: Ineffective surgical fluid waste management in operating rooms (OR) creates a significant environmental burden, reduces OR efficiency, and adds physical challenges for surgical staff. There is a need for waste management systems that improve OR efficiency, safety, and sustainability. The GREEN study (Greening operating Rooms in EuropE comparing Neptune vs. canisters) was conducted to compare the impact of two fluid waste management systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 2-arm, nonrandomized, prospective service evaluation of fluid waste extraction was conducted using observational time series and surveys. Fluid waste-related data were collected from routine urologic and orthopedic surgeries across three European hospital sites. The primary endpoint of waste disposal impact was the volume of treated waste after surgery (kilograms) using Stryker’s Neptune device (n=43) or canisters (n=41). The authors hypothesized that the surgical waste volume related to Neptune is less than the waste volume related to canisters. Secondary endpoints included time efficiency, user satisfaction, and staff ergonomics. RESULTS: The total weight of device-related treated waste products was reduced by 98.5% when using Neptune (0.2±0.7 kg) compared with traditional canisters (13.2±16.6 kg; P<0.001). Decreased waste weight also translated to enhanced ergonomic safety for surgical staff, as Neptune reduced surgical fluid weight handled by staff by an average of 34 kg per procedure, a 96% reduction compared to canisters. Furthermore, the use of the Neptune system improved OR efficiency by reducing the number of staff required to manage the fluid suction device (P<0.001) and the time spent disposing of fluid waste (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Stryker’s Neptune waste management system significantly reduces the volume of treated waste per surgery and improves OR efficiency, staff safety, and user satisfaction over the traditional canister system. This is a more eco-responsible approach to OR fluid waste management and could be considered in any healthcare establishment that generates fluid waste. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-07-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10473330/ /pubmed/37663714 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MS9.0000000000000934 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Research
Baker, Sarah
Clark, Julie
Pla, Angels B.
Feixas, Eulalia V.
Huegel, Julianne
Tariq, Luqman
Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study
title Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study
title_full Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study
title_fullStr Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study
title_full_unstemmed Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study
title_short Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study
title_sort neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in europe: results of the green study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10473330/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37663714
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MS9.0000000000000934
work_keys_str_mv AT bakersarah neptuneversuscanisterbasedsurgicalwastemanagementineuroperesultsofthegreenstudy
AT clarkjulie neptuneversuscanisterbasedsurgicalwastemanagementineuroperesultsofthegreenstudy
AT plaangelsb neptuneversuscanisterbasedsurgicalwastemanagementineuroperesultsofthegreenstudy
AT feixaseulaliav neptuneversuscanisterbasedsurgicalwastemanagementineuroperesultsofthegreenstudy
AT huegeljulianne neptuneversuscanisterbasedsurgicalwastemanagementineuroperesultsofthegreenstudy
AT tariqluqman neptuneversuscanisterbasedsurgicalwastemanagementineuroperesultsofthegreenstudy