ArticleSurgery open science2025
Assessing the environmental impact associated with disruptive surgical bleeding.
Article in Surgery open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Minimizing avoidable healthcare resource use can support a move towards more sustainable healthcare systems. Few studies have sought to evaluate the environmental impact of complications associated with specific surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to assess the environmental impact associated with disruptive surgical bleeding across a broad range of procedures. Methods: The environmental impact assessment was performed using clinical and healthcare resource use data from a retrospective database analysis of patients with disruptive bleeding across nine procedures. Emissions data from the Sustainable Healthcare Coalition were sourced for the relevant resource use activities and used to calculate the climate, water and waste impact associated with disruptive surgical bleeding. Results: Across the procedures of interest, surgical bleeding was shown to incur a mean environmental impact of 167 kg CO Conclusions: Surgical bleeding is associated with a substantial environmental impact. This study demonstrates the potential to use existing resource use data associated with specific healthcare activities to assess their environmental impact, helping to identify key areas for improvement in the sustainability of surgical departments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.