Environmental impact of single-use versus reusable gastroscopes
For one examination, SU gastroscope have a 2.5 times higher carbon footprint than RU ones. These data will help with the logistics and planning of an endoscopic service in relation to other economic and environmental factors.
Authors
- Mathieu Pioche (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6482-2375)
- Daniel Grinberg (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3184-5095)
- Arthur Berger (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0387-4734)
- Marion Schaefer (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5002-0486)
- Jérémie Jacques
- Robin Baddeley (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5604-246X)
- Heiko Pohl (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9453-0587)
- Raphaëlle Grau
- Mikael Mochet
- João A. Cunha Neves (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8354-1619)
- Arthur Laporte
- Enrique Rodríguez de Santiago (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2852-6042)
- Mathilde Boube
- Jérôme Rivory
- Pierre‐Jean Cottinet
Institutions
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse (FR)
- XLIM (FR)
- Association Pôle Environnement Sud Aquitaine (FR)
- Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Nancy (FR)
- Hospices Civils de Lyon (FR)
- Kings Health Partners (GB)
- White River Junction VA Medical Center (US)
- Algarve Biomedical Center (PT)
- Hôpital Edouard Herriot (FR)
- Centre Hospitalier de la Côte Basque (FR)
- Hôpital Dupuytren (FR)
- St Mark's Hospital (GB)
- Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal (ES)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Gut
- Published
- 2024-08-08
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2024-332293
- Citations
- 21
- Primary Topic
- Climate Change and Health Impacts
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 6.61