Environmental sustainability and gynaecological surgery

Which factors influence behaviour? An interview study

Journal article (2023)

Authors

Kim E. van Nieuwenhuizen Leiden University Medical Center
Ingena G.I.A. Both Leiden University Medical Center
Petra J. Porte Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
A.C. van der Eijk Leiden University Medical Center, Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology - Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering
AC van der Eijk Leiden University Medical Center, Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology - Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering
F.W. Jansen Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology - Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering , Leiden University Medical Center
Research Group
Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology (Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering) (TU Delft)
Copyright: © 2023 Kim E. van Nieuwenhuizen, Ingena G.I.A. Both, Petra J. Porte, A.C. van der Eijk, F.W. Jansen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17709
More Info
expand_more

Published Date

2023

Language

English

Faculty

Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering

Department

Biomechanical Engineering

Research Group

Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology

Abstract

Objective: To assess the various factors that influence environmentally sustainable behaviour in gynaecological surgery and examine the differences between gynaecologists and residents. Design: An interview study. Setting: Academic and non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands. Population: Gynaecologists (n = 10) and residents (n = 6). Methods: Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews to determine the various factors that influence environmentally sustainable behaviour in gynaecological surgery and to examine the differences between gynaecologists and residents. By using the Desmond framework and the COM-B BCW, both organisational and individual factors related to behaviour were considered. Main outcome measures: Factors that influence environmentally sustainable behaviour. Results: Awareness is increasing but practical knowledge is insufficient. It is crucial to integrate education on the environmental impact of everyday decisions for residents and gynaecologists. Gynaecologists make their own choices but residents’ autonomy is limited. There is the necessity to provide environmentally sustainable surgical equipment without compromising other standards. There is a need for a societal change that encourages safe and open communication about environmental sustainability. To transition to environmentally sustainable practices, leadership, time, collaboration with the industry and supportive regulatory changes are essential. Conclusion: This study lays the groundwork for promoting more environmentally sustainable behaviour in gynaecological surgery. The key recommendations, addressing hospital regulations, leadership, policy revisions, collaboration with the industry, guideline development and education, offer practical steps towards a more sustainable healthcare system. Encouraging environmentally sustainable practices should be embraced to enhance the well-being of both our planet and our population, driving us closer to a more environmentally sustainable future in healthcare.