Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal Injection

Abstract Purpose: To estimate the carbon footprint of a single intravitreal injection in a hospital-based intravitreal service. Methods: Greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the delivery of an intravitreal injection were calculated using a hybrid lifecycle analysis technique. Data were collected...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Barry Power, Robert Brady, Paul Connell
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Knowledge E 2021-07-01
Series:Journal of Ophthalmic & Vision Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.18502/jovr.v16i3.9433
id doaj-94e58e5aba96451b97cc0d451081030f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-94e58e5aba96451b97cc0d451081030f2021-08-04T06:23:02ZengKnowledge EJournal of Ophthalmic & Vision Research2008-20102008-322X2021-07-0116336737610.18502/jovr.v16i3.9433jovr.v16i3.9433Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal InjectionBarry Power0Robert Brady1Paul Connell2 Vitreoretinal Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland Vitreoretinal Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland Vitreoretinal Department, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, IrelandAbstract Purpose: To estimate the carbon footprint of a single intravitreal injection in a hospital-based intravitreal service. Methods: Greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the delivery of an intravitreal injection were calculated using a hybrid lifecycle analysis technique. Data were collected regarding procurement of materials, patient travel, and building energy use. Results: Carbon emissions associated with a single intravitreal injection, excluding the anti-VEGF agent, were 13.68 kg CO 2 eq. This equates to 82,100 kg CO 2 eq annually for our service. Patient travel accounted for the majority of emissions at 77%, with procurement accounting 19% for and building energy usage for 4% of total emissions. The omission of items considered dispensable from injection packs would reduce carbon emissions by an estimated 0.56 kg per injection – an annual saving of 3,360 kg CO 2 eq for our service. Similar savings, if extrapolated to a country the size of the United Kingdom, could yield annual carbon savings of 450,000 kg CO 2 eq. For context, a single one-way economy transatlantic flight produces 480 kg CO 2 eq per person. Conclusion: Wasteful practice in healthcare increases greenhouse gas production and drives climate change. The healthcare sector should be a leader in sustainable practice promotion and changes to high volume procedures have the largest impact on emissions. Long-acting agents offer the greatest future potential for meaningful reductions.https://doi.org/10.18502/jovr.v16i3.9433anti-vegfclimate changemedical retinasustainability
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Barry Power
Robert Brady
Paul Connell
spellingShingle Barry Power
Robert Brady
Paul Connell
Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal Injection
Journal of Ophthalmic & Vision Research
anti-vegf
climate change
medical retina
sustainability
author_facet Barry Power
Robert Brady
Paul Connell
author_sort Barry Power
title Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal Injection
title_short Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal Injection
title_full Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal Injection
title_fullStr Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal Injection
title_full_unstemmed Analyzing the Carbon Footprint of an Intravitreal Injection
title_sort analyzing the carbon footprint of an intravitreal injection
publisher Knowledge E
series Journal of Ophthalmic & Vision Research
issn 2008-2010
2008-322X
publishDate 2021-07-01
description Abstract Purpose: To estimate the carbon footprint of a single intravitreal injection in a hospital-based intravitreal service. Methods: Greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the delivery of an intravitreal injection were calculated using a hybrid lifecycle analysis technique. Data were collected regarding procurement of materials, patient travel, and building energy use. Results: Carbon emissions associated with a single intravitreal injection, excluding the anti-VEGF agent, were 13.68 kg CO 2 eq. This equates to 82,100 kg CO 2 eq annually for our service. Patient travel accounted for the majority of emissions at 77%, with procurement accounting 19% for and building energy usage for 4% of total emissions. The omission of items considered dispensable from injection packs would reduce carbon emissions by an estimated 0.56 kg per injection – an annual saving of 3,360 kg CO 2 eq for our service. Similar savings, if extrapolated to a country the size of the United Kingdom, could yield annual carbon savings of 450,000 kg CO 2 eq. For context, a single one-way economy transatlantic flight produces 480 kg CO 2 eq per person. Conclusion: Wasteful practice in healthcare increases greenhouse gas production and drives climate change. The healthcare sector should be a leader in sustainable practice promotion and changes to high volume procedures have the largest impact on emissions. Long-acting agents offer the greatest future potential for meaningful reductions.
topic anti-vegf
climate change
medical retina
sustainability
url https://doi.org/10.18502/jovr.v16i3.9433
work_keys_str_mv AT barrypower analyzingthecarbonfootprintofanintravitrealinjection
AT robertbrady analyzingthecarbonfootprintofanintravitrealinjection
AT paulconnell analyzingthecarbonfootprintofanintravitrealinjection
_version_ 1721222686900748288