ArticleThe journal of climate change and health
Real and perceived barriers to effective use of cataract surgical supplies.
Article in The journal of climate change and health. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Cataract surgery, among the most common procedures worldwide, significantly contributes to climate change through both solid waste and air pollution, highlighting the urgent need for targeted interventions. Implementation faces hurdles including legal constraints and concerns about infection risks and malpractice. Methods: This article examines federal and state regulatory structures around two key waste reduction strategies: reduction of multidose medications and distribution of partly-used operating room medication to patients post-surgery. Results: We find little-to-no legitimate regulatory barriers to either waste reduction practice. Dispensing and redistributing partly-used medication has been codified in law in some states. Evidence-based reports indicate minimal risks for infection with proper handling. From 1998 until August 2024, according to the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company, there were no reported endophthalmitis lawsuits from using multidose eye drops perioperatively. Malpractice fears also appear to be generally unfounded considering guidelines by various professional organizations identifying these practices as acceptable standards of care and lack of related lawsuits. Conclusion: In order to implement evidence-based sustainability interventions, more education and training is needed to ensure clinicians and staff are aware of real and perceived barriers.
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.