ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2026
Ditch the drapes: Non-sterile substitution in proctology, a population-based cost and carbon life cycle analysis with early implementation audit.
Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo quantify cost, waste, carbon emissions and early feasibility of source reduction in proctology.
methodPopulation-based cost and carbon analysis of common proctology procedures in New South Wales public hospitals. Targeted recycling was compared with source reduction through drape avoidance, clean non-sterile protective equipment, and selective opening of suction and diathermy. A focused audit assessed state-level inputs against routine practice. Implementation outcomes followed adoption at one tertiary hospital.
resultsAnnual procedures totalled 6753 in New South Wales. The Australian denominator was 22,084 procedures. Suction and diathermy were unused in 54% and 46% of audited procedures respectively. Targeted recycling was projected to save AUD 0.84 (GBP 0.44, EUR 0.52) and 0.47 kg waste per procedure. Source reduction was projected to save AUD 40 (GBP 21.06, EUR 24.80), 1.36 kg waste and 7.9 kg CO
conclusionSource reduction was feasible in early proctology implementation and projected to reduce cost, waste and carbon emissions. These proof-of-concept findings support multicentre evaluation but do not establish clinical equivalence.
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.