Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
This two-part review addresses the pressing need for environmental sustainability in dermatological surgery, driven by the NHS’s commitment to net-zero emissions. Part 2 of this review extends the discussion of sustainability in dermatological surgery by focusing on system-wide changes in service delivery and identifying future opportunities for reducing environmental impact. Building on the strategies outlined in Part 1, which explored low-carbon alternatives and operational resource optimisation, Part 2 advocates for a comprehensive shift in the skin surgery service. Key strategies include reducing overall surgical activity, advancing research and innovation, and enhancing management practices to align with sustainability goals. Reducing surgical activity mainly involves the prevention of skin cancers, in addition to optimising current patient pathways and empowering patients to take ownership of their follow-up. Outside of immediate clinical decision-making at the individual level, the review highlights the importance of managerial policy, procurement practices and supply chain factors in driving broader national and international sustainability efforts. Advancing the sustainability agenda will also require targeted research and innovation, particularly in digital health solutions using evidence-based practices. By integrating these strategies, this review aims to provide a framework for reducing the environmental footprint of dermatological surgery and advancing towards a more sustainable healthcare system.
This two-part review addresses the pressing need for environmental sustainability in dermatological surgery, driven by the NHS’s commitment to net-zero emissions. Part 2 of this review extends the discussion of sustainability in dermatological surgery by focusing on system-wide changes in service delivery and identifying future opportunities for reducing environmental impact. Building on the strategies outlined in Part 1, which explored low-carbon alternatives and operational resource optimisation, Part 2 advocates for a comprehensive shift in the skin surgery service. Key strategies include reducing overall surgical activity, advancing research and innovation, and enhancing management practices to align with sustainability goals. Reducing surgical activity mainly involves the prevention of skin cancers, in addition to optimising current patient pathways and empowering patients to take ownership of their follow-up. Outside of immediate clinical decision-making at the individual level, the review highlights the importance of managerial policy, procurement practices and supply chain factors in driving broader national and international sustainability efforts. Advancing the sustainability agenda will also require targeted research and innovation, particularly in digital health solutions using evidence-based practices. By integrating these strategies, this review aims to provide a framework for reducing the environmental footprint of dermatological surgery and advancing towards a more sustainable healthcare system.
Background. The healthcare sector substantially contributes to global greenhouse gas emissions. While being pivotal for improving care, clinical trials involve various activities beyond routine care that contribute to their carbon footprint. We aimed to synthesize current evidence on the carbon footprint of clinical trials and the methodologies used to estimate these emissions. Methods. In this systematic review, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies published in English until April 16, 2024. Studies focusing on the carbon footprint of clinical trials were included. Abstracts without full-text availability were excluded. Four reviewers independently extracted data, focusing on trial characteristics, carbon emission quantification methodologies, and reported emissions per trial and patient. The risk of bias was assessed using a transparency checklist for carbon footprint calculations. Findings. The review included 12 studies (6 analytical studies and 6 expert opinions). Total emissions per trial varied widely, ranging from 18 to 2,498 tons CO2eq, with emissions per patient ranging from 25 to 2,452 kg CO2eq. Methodologically, the three most recent studies included nearly all emissions domains with high levels of data completeness, whereas the other three studies considered fewer than half of the emission domains, with medium to low data completeness. Only two studies fully disclosed their conversion factors. Four expert groups agreed on the need to develop standardized estimation tools for prospective use. Experts unanimously called for the involvement of all research stakeholders in raising global awareness of the carbon footprint of clinical trials. Interpretation. The carbon footprint of clinical trials shows substantial variability, primarily due to differences in methodology and the domains of emissions assessed. Addressing these methodological inconsistencies with standardized and openly accessible tools is essential for developing strategies to reduce the environmental impact of clinical research, aligning with broader global efforts to mitigate climate change. Funding. No funding
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.