Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35965477›Full record

ArticleBone & joint open2022

Environmental sustainability in orthopaedic surgery : a scoping review.

Kar May Phoon, Irrum Afzal, David H Sochart, Vipin Asopa, Panagiotis Gikas, Deiary Kader

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Bone & joint open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Reliability of artificial intelligence in predicting total knee arthroplasty component sizes: a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Environmental sustainability evidence in critical care medicine: a scoping review.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Waste Generation in Pediatric Orthopaedic Hardware Removal Surgery.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kar May PhoonSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7247-3534
Irrum AfzalSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0199-8725
David H SochartSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6541-7187
Vipin AsopaSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8926-1343
Panagiotis GikasSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.
Deiary KaderSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8332-2296

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsIn the UK, the NHS generates an estimated 25 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (4% to 5% of the nation's total carbon emissions) and produces over 500,000 tonnes of waste annually. There is limited evidence demonstrating the principles of sustainability and its benefits within orthopaedic surgery. The primary aim of this study was to analyze the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery and the environmentally sustainable initiatives undertaken to address this. The secondary aim of this study was to describe the barriers to making sustainable changes within orthopaedic surgery.

methodsA literature search was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines through EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed libraries using two domains of terms: "orthopaedic surgery" and "environmental sustainability".

resultsA total of 13 studies were included in the final analysis. All papers studied the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery in one of three areas: waste management, resource consumption, and carbon emissions. Waste segregation was a prevalent issue and described by nine studies, with up to 74.4% of hazardous waste being generated. Of this, six studies reported recycling waste and up to 43.9% of waste per procedure was recyclable. Large joint arthroplasties generated the highest amount of recyclable waste per procedure. Three studies investigated carbon emissions from intraoperative consumables, sterilization methods, and through the use of telemedicine. One study investigated water wastage and demonstrated that simple changes to practice can reduce water consumption by up to 63%. The two most common barriers to implementing environmentally sustainable changes identified across the studies was a lack of appropriate infrastructure and lack of education and training.

conclusionEnvironmental sustainability in orthopaedic surgery is a growing area with a wide potential for meaningful change. Further research to cumulatively study the carbon footprint of orthopaedic surgery and the wider impact of environmentally sustainable changes is necessary.Cite this article:

Indexed as

carbonCarbon emissionCarbon footprintEnvironmental impactEnvironmentally sustainable changesEnvironmental sustainabilityfemoroacetabular impingementhand surgeryjoint arthroplastiesMedlineopen reduction internal fixation (ORIF)orthopaedic surgeryOrthopaedic surgeryResource consumptiontelemedicinetotal hip arthroplasties (THAs)total knee arthroplasties (TKAs)Waste management

Identifiers

PMID35965477
PMCPMC9422904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.