ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Nursing leadership for sustainable endoscopy: a narrative review and practice framework.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastrointestinal endoscopy is a resource-intensive clinical service that generates substantial waste, consumes water and energy, and depends on disposable accessories, sterile packaging, and complex reprocessing pathways. Although green endoscopy has received increasing attention, current sustainability strategies have often emphasized physician decision-making, technological innovation, or industry-level redesign, while the practical contribution of endoscopy nurses remains insufficiently defined. This narrative review developed a nursing-centred framework for sustainable endoscopy practice, focusing on how nurses can translate green endoscopy policy into routine clinical action. Literature searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar were updated through 31 August 2026; CINAHL was subsequently searched on 4 September 2026, and professional-society statements and reference lists were hand-searched. The CINAHL search retrieved 403 records, with no unique additional records remaining after deduplication against the existing search set. Environmental evidence was classified as directly measured physical or resource outcomes, calculated or modelled carbon-footprint outcomes (including life-cycle assessment), or inferred downstream implications from clinical or operational findings. The evidence varied in study design, clinical setting, sustainability focus, and reported outcomes, and was synthesized thematically across the endoscopy pathway. Key domains included nursing-led waste segregation, consumable stewardship, cleaning and reprocessing support, patient preparation, and sustainability education, together with nursing-supported multidisciplinary decisions on device selection, procedure scheduling, and green procurement. Available evidence suggests that nursing-led interventions, including structured waste segregation, staff education, audit, careful management of consumables, and reprocessing stewardship, can reduce avoidable waste and, where carbon accounting was performed, associated calculated or modelled emissions and waste-processing costs while maintaining patient safety and procedural efficiency. However, nursing-specific intervention studies and standardized sustainability indicators remain limited, and much of the evidence originates from high-resource settings. A designated Green Endoscopy Nurse or sustainability-lead function may provide a useful implementation model for embedding environmental responsibility into everyday endoscopy nursing practice, although current evidence does not yet establish this role as a universal staffing standard.
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.