ArticleJSES international2025
Modeling life cycle analysis of eco-designed practices in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a pilot study.
Article in JSES international, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Climate change represents a critical public health challenge, with health-care systems contributing 5.5%-8% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Methods: This pilot study assessed the environmental impact of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, a common surgical procedure, and evaluates the potential of eco-designed care practices to reduce this impact. Environmental impact was evaluated through life cycle analysis using the ReCIPE method, measuring CO2 production and 11 other environmental indicators. Data collection included resource use, waste generation, and procedural details from representative surgeries. The model also implemented measures such as reusable surgical equipment, reduced halogenated anesthetics, optimized waste sorting, and locally produced, sustainable staff garments. Results: Results showed a 54% reduction in CO2 emissions (109.2 kgCO2eq vs. 51.1 kgCO2eq) and significant improvements across all assessed environmental categories, including a 60% decrease in stratospheric ozone depletion and a 52% reduction in ozone formation. Each surgical phase demonstrated decreased environmental impact, particularly in waste management and anesthesia. Conclusion: While limited by its single-center design, this study highlights the feasibility of integrating eco-design principles into health-care practices. These findings emphasize the importance of reducing the environmental footprint of surgical care, aligning with global sustainability goals. Future research should expand on these preliminary findings to develop standardized eco-design strategies in health-care systems.
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.