ArticleBMC nephrology2025
Sustainable and accessible hemodialysis: life cycle assessment on central acid delivery system.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Greener dialysis in practice: life cycle assessment of sustainable practice changes in haemodialysis care.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
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
Abstract
introductionThe healthcare sector contributes over 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions. As healthcare systems pursue carbon reduction targets, sustainable innovations in clinical operations are essential. Hemodialysis (HD) relies heavily on dialysate concentrates as one of its major consumables. This study evaluates the environmental impact of implementing a central acid concentrate delivery system (CCDS) using dry concentrate powder at the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMC Utrecht) and examines its broader global applicability.
methodsA comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to assess the environmental impacts of acid concentrate delivery via single-use liquid canisters versus CCDS using dry powder in reusable barrels at UMC Utrecht. The analysis includes additional scenarios involving long-distance distribution to Italy in Europe, Kenya in Africa, and the Philippines in Asia.
resultsImplementation of CCDS at UMC Utrecht reduced carbon emissions by 58%. Endpoint impacts on human health, ecosystem quality, and resource scarcity were reduced by more than half. Despite longer transport distances in global scenarios, CCDS consistently outperformed the canister system across most impact categories, driven by reuse of packaging and reduced transport volume and weight.
conclusionsCCDS offers a more sustainable alternative, with substantial environmental benefits even in long-distance applications. Operational advantages include reduced manual handling and simplified logistics. By enabling local dialysate production and decreasing reliance on imported disposables, CCDS may also improve accessibility in low-resource settings. Widespread adoption could thereby advance environmental sustainability globally.
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.