ArticleBMC anesthesiology2026
Environmentally sustainable anaesthesia: a cross-sectional survey of anesthesiologists in teaching hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnaesthesia is a recognized contributor to healthcare-related greenhouse gas emissions and operating room waste. While high-income countries (HICs) have begun implementing sustainability initiatives, evidence from lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited. This study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of anesthesiologists in teaching hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan, regarding environmentally sustainable anaesthesia, using the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists (WFSA) consensus principles as a benchmark.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of consultant anaesthesiologists, trainees, and staff anaesthesia medical officers in College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan-accredited teaching hospitals in Karachi. Items were grouped a priori into Knowledge (4 items), Attitude (8 items), and Practice (9 items) domains. Composite scores were calculated (1–7 scale), and internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach’s alpha. Between-group differences were evaluated using Mann–Whitney U or Kruskal–Wallis tests. An ordinal logistic regression was used to identify predictors of Practice category, and a linear regression sensitivity analysis was performed using continuous Practice scores.
resultsEighty-two respondents participated (51% public, 49% private institutions). Internal consistency was acceptable for all domains (α = 0.73–0.8). Mean (SD) scores were: Knowledge 6.10 (0.77), Attitude 5.99 (0.73), and Practice 5.24 (0.87). Over 90% agreed with actions such as measuring departmental carbon footprints and favoring well-maintained circle systems. No significant differences in scores were observed by institution type or designation categories. In regression analysis, Attitude was a significant predictor of Practice. The modest sample size may limit statistical power and the stability of regression estimates.
conclusionAnaesthesiologists in teaching hospitals in Karachi demonstrated high knowledge and positive attitudes toward sustainable anaesthesia, but reported practice was lower and may be overestimated by self-report. Given the modest sample size and single-city design, caution is warranted in generalizing these findings beyond similar urban academic settings.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.