To Dispose or to Reuse? Analyzing the Life Cycle Impacts and Costs of Disposal, Sterilization, and Reuse of Electrophysiological Catheters

Catherine Lalman, Hirushie Karunathilake () and Rajeev Ruparathna
Additional contact information
Catherine Lalman: Eberly College of Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, 201 Old Main, State College, PA 16802, USA
Hirushie Karunathilake: Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Katubedda, Moratuwa 10400, Sri Lanka
Rajeev Ruparathna: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, ON N9B 3P4, Canada

Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, issue 6, 1-23

Abstract: Given the growing ecological footprint of anthropomorphic activities, considering the environmental impacts of any process is becoming increasingly important. This is especially true for the healthcare industry, whose objective of maintaining human health standards is impeded by its own unsustainable practices. To this end, life cycle analysis is particularly helpful. There have not been many life cycle analyses performed on a healthcare device or on medical procedures. Many medical devices are single use, which leads to a significant waste management problem, particularly as plastic is widely used in their composition. The objective of this study is to present a life-cycle-thinking-based approach to compare the environmental impacts associated with single-use electrophysiological catheters with the sterilization of reusable electrophysiological catheters using hydrogen peroxide, ethylene oxide, and peracetic acid. A life cycle assessment was conducted considering different use, disinfection, and disposal scenarios for electrophysiological catheters, using ReCiPe midpoint and endpoint analysis with the SimaPro software. The findings indicate that using single-use disposable electrophysiological catheters, instead of sterilizing a single catheter using either ETO or hydrogen peroxide and reusing multiple times, is preferable from a purely environmental perspective. However, the costs reduce drastically when equipment is sterilized and reused instead of disposing them after using one time. This in turn illustrates that depending on the process, sanitizing and reusing medical devices may not always be more resource-efficient than single device usage. From a cost perspective, ETO sterilization has the lowest costs, and yet it leads to an aggregate environmental impact of over 20 times compared to the single-use scenario, mainly due to the required detoxification process. The outcomes of this research will assist the health care industry in identifying the most suitable operational procedures considering patient safety, economics, and environmental stewardship, and in developing policies and guidelines for a more sustainable healthcare sector.

Keywords: medical devices; life cycle assessment; healthcare industry sustainability; eco-efficiency analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5363/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5363/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5363-:d:1100293

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().