Current practices and expectations to reduce environmental impact of electrophysiology catheters: results from an EHRA/LIRYC European physician survey . Issue 8 (9th August 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Boussuge-Roze, Julie; Boveda, Serge; Mahida, Saagar; Anic, Ante; Conte, Giulio; Chun, Julian K R; Marijon, Eloi; Sacher, Frederic; Jais, Pierre
• Is Part Of: Europace. Volume 24:Issue 8(2022)
• Page Start: 1300
• Page End: 1306
• Publication Date: 2022-08-09
• Subjects: Electrophysiology catheter -- Environmental impact -- Sustainability -- Recycling -- Reuse -- Reprocessing -- Circular economy -- EHRA survey; Arrhythmia -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Cardiac pacing -- Periodicals; Catheter ablation -- Periodicals; Heart -- Physiology -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; 617.4120645
• DOI: 10.1093/europace/euac085
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1099-5129

Abstract

Abstract: The healthcare sector accounts for nearly 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and is a significant contributor to complex waste. Reducing the environmental impact of technology-heavy medical fields such as cardiac electrophysiology (EP) is a priority. The aim of this survey was to investigate the practice and expectations in European centres on EP catheters environmental sustainability. A 24-item online questionnaire on EP catheters sustainability was disseminated by the EHRA Scientific Initiatives Committee in collaboration with the Lyric Institute. A total of 278 physicians from 42 centres were polled; 62% were motivated to reduce the environmental impact of EP procedures. It was reported that 50% of mapping catheters and 53% of ablation catheters are usually discarded to medical waste, and only 20% and 14% of mapping and ablation catheters re-used. Yet, re-use of catheters was the most commonly cited potential sustainability solution (60% and 57% of physicians for mapping and ablation catheters, respectively). The majority of 69% currently discarded packaging. Reduced (42%) and reusable (39%) packaging also featured prominently as potential sustainable solutions. Lack of engagement from host institutions was the most commonly cited barrier to sustainable practices (59%). Complexity of the process and challenges to behavioral change were other commonly cited barriers (48% and 47%, respectively). The most commonly cited solutions towards more sustainable practices were regulatory changes (31%), education (19%), and product after-use recommendations (19%). In conclusion, EP physicians demonstrate high motivation towards sustainable practices. However, significant engagement and behavioural change, at local institution, regulatory and industry level is required before sustainable practices can be embedded into routine care.