ArticleThe journal of climate change and health
Anaesthetic gas emissions in a tertiary hospital in Pakistan: Behavioural drivers versus technological solutions.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anaesthetic gases contribute disproportionately to healthcare-related greenhouse gas emissions. End-tidal control (ETC), originally developed to reduce cognitive load and improve dosing accuracy, has been promoted as a potential strategy to lower emissions. However, its benefit must be considered alongside established drivers such as agent choice and flow. This study examined predictors of emissions, focusing on clinician behaviour versus technological modifications such as ETC. Methods: We conducted a six-month prospective audit at Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. Data were extracted from Carestation™ Insights. The outcome was emissions (kgCO₂e/min), with predictors including ETC use, fresh gas flow, case duration, and flow-normalised consumption of isoflurane, sevoflurane, and nitrous oxide. Multivariable regression models were run for all cases and stratified by agent. Results: A total of 7231 cases were analysed. In the combined regression, nitrous oxide usage was the strongest predictor of emissions (β=1.56, Conclusions: Anaesthetic gas emissions are driven mainly by clinician behaviours, agent choice, concentration, and flow, rather than by end-tidal control. Nitrous oxide is the largest contributor and should be targeted for elimination. Low-cost behavioural interventions offer the most effective and scalable pathway for sustainable anaesthesia in resource-limited settings.
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.