Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40184167›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Environmental Impact of Physical Visits and Telemedicine in Nursing Care at Home: Comparative Life Cycle Assessment.

Egid M van Bree, Lynn E Snijder, Hans C Ossebaard, Evelyn A Brakema

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

4 authors.

Egid M van BreeDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2770-4097
Lynn E SnijderCenter for Sustainable Healthcare, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1273-2247
Hans C OssebaardZorginstituut Nederland, Diemen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9537-9655
Evelyn A BrakemaDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7376-4648

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe health care sector contributes notably to environmental harms, impacting human and ecosystem health. Hence, countries increasingly set ambitions to transition to environmentally sustainable health care, focusing on resource use, energy consumption, and patient travel. Telemedicine is often considered a promising solution to reduce travel-related carbon emissions. However, underlying environmental impact assessments lack important components such as staff travel and fail to adhere to standardized conduct and reporting. Moreover, assessments of telemedicine use in primary care are scarce.

objectiveThis study aims to quantify and compare the environmental impact of physical visits and telemedicine visits in the context of domiciliary care and home nursing.

methodsWe conducted a life cycle assessment following international ISO-14040/44 standards of all resources required per individual patient visit, either in person at the patient's home or via video calling with a dedicated user-friendly tablet. We collected anonymous user data in collaboration with a telemedicine service company, complemented by consulting staff members of four nursing organizations. Telemedicine visits were elementary in nature, such as supporting patients in taking their medication or structuring their daily agenda. We quantified average environmental impacts from cradle to grave, using the Environmental Footprint method, and verified the robustness of the comparison via uncertainty analysis. The variability of environmental impacts in different settings was explored using scenario analyses for the available minimum to maximum ranges.

resultsCompared to a single physical visit in the studied setting, a telemedicine visit contributed less to global warming (0.1 vs 0.3 kg of carbon dioxide equivalents [kgCO

conclusionsUsing telemedicine for domiciliary care and home nursing mostly reduces its environmental impact compared to physical visits. Benefits are larger in rural settings, where travel distances between patients are larger, and apply to multiple environmental impacts but not always to mineral/metal resource use. In urban settings, factors that influence the degree to which telemedicine is environmentally beneficial are whether staff are working from home versus at the office, commuting to the office by bicycle versus by car, and reusing video-calling devices. Accordingly, considerate application of telemedicine is important to support care for both human and planetary health.

Indexed as

EnvironmentHome Care ServicesTelemedicineCarbon FootprintHumanscarbon footprintdigital health careecologyeHealthenvironmentenvironmental impactfootprintlife cyclelife cycle assessmentnursingphysical visitsplanetary healthsustainabilitysustainable health caretelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID40184167
PMCPMC12008697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.