Rasi Mizori, Muhayman Sadiq, Yasser Al Omran, Charmilie Chandrakumar, Thomas Lewis, Omar Musbahi, Karthik Karuppaiah
{"title":"创伤骨科手术中植入物浪费的成本和可持续性考虑:一项观察性研究。","authors":"Rasi Mizori, Muhayman Sadiq, Yasser Al Omran, Charmilie Chandrakumar, Thomas Lewis, Omar Musbahi, Karthik Karuppaiah","doi":"10.1007/s00264-025-06532-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Implant wastage in trauma and orthopaedic (T&O) surgery remains an under-reported yet significant issue, contributing to rising healthcare costs and environmental concerns. With increasing surgical demand driven by an ageing population and the growing prevalence of conditions like osteoporosis, this study aimed to quantify implant wastage in T&O procedures at a Level 1 Major Trauma Centre in London, assessing both its frequency and financial impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all weekday T&O procedures performed between 1st December 2023 and 31st January 2024. Two of the authors identified wasted implants using intraoperative implant logbooks, and cross-referencing implant stickers with post-operative radiographs. Data pertaining to patient demographics, procedure types, surgical sites, and implant usage were collected. Cost analysis was performed using procurement data to determine the financial impact of implant wastage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 184 procedures analysed, 131 (71.2%) used implants, with wastage observed in 108 (82.4%) cases. A total of 141 implants were wasted, with screws accounting for 92.9% (n = 131) of wasted implants. Locking screws were the most frequently discarded (n = 65; 46.1%). Across ORIF and intramedullary nailing procedures, an overall screw wastage rate of 20% (17-31%) was observed with 2.4 screws wasted per trauma procedure. The financial cost of implant wastage over the 44-day study period amounted to approximately £335 per day and £136 per case.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights the substantial economic burden associated with implant wastage in T&O surgery, with screws, particularly locking screws, being the primary contributors. Targeted interventions, including improved preoperative planning, precision-based implant selection, and enhanced intraoperative decision-making, are essential to reducing waste and improving cost-efficiency and sustainability in surgical practices. Further research should explore the broader economic and environmental impact of implant wastage, incorporating factors such as operative time and carbon footprint to develop comprehensive waste-reduction strategies.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":14450,"journal":{"name":"International Orthopaedics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The cost of implant waste in trauma orthopaedic surgery and sustainability considerations: an observational study.\",\"authors\":\"Rasi Mizori, Muhayman Sadiq, Yasser Al Omran, Charmilie Chandrakumar, Thomas Lewis, Omar Musbahi, Karthik Karuppaiah\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00264-025-06532-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Implant wastage in trauma and orthopaedic (T&O) surgery remains an under-reported yet significant issue, contributing to rising healthcare costs and environmental concerns. With increasing surgical demand driven by an ageing population and the growing prevalence of conditions like osteoporosis, this study aimed to quantify implant wastage in T&O procedures at a Level 1 Major Trauma Centre in London, assessing both its frequency and financial impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all weekday T&O procedures performed between 1st December 2023 and 31st January 2024. Two of the authors identified wasted implants using intraoperative implant logbooks, and cross-referencing implant stickers with post-operative radiographs. Data pertaining to patient demographics, procedure types, surgical sites, and implant usage were collected. Cost analysis was performed using procurement data to determine the financial impact of implant wastage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 184 procedures analysed, 131 (71.2%) used implants, with wastage observed in 108 (82.4%) cases. A total of 141 implants were wasted, with screws accounting for 92.9% (n = 131) of wasted implants. Locking screws were the most frequently discarded (n = 65; 46.1%). Across ORIF and intramedullary nailing procedures, an overall screw wastage rate of 20% (17-31%) was observed with 2.4 screws wasted per trauma procedure. The financial cost of implant wastage over the 44-day study period amounted to approximately £335 per day and £136 per case.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights the substantial economic burden associated with implant wastage in T&O surgery, with screws, particularly locking screws, being the primary contributors. Targeted interventions, including improved preoperative planning, precision-based implant selection, and enhanced intraoperative decision-making, are essential to reducing waste and improving cost-efficiency and sustainability in surgical practices. Further research should explore the broader economic and environmental impact of implant wastage, incorporating factors such as operative time and carbon footprint to develop comprehensive waste-reduction strategies.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>IV.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14450,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Orthopaedics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-025-06532-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-025-06532-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The cost of implant waste in trauma orthopaedic surgery and sustainability considerations: an observational study.
Purpose: Implant wastage in trauma and orthopaedic (T&O) surgery remains an under-reported yet significant issue, contributing to rising healthcare costs and environmental concerns. With increasing surgical demand driven by an ageing population and the growing prevalence of conditions like osteoporosis, this study aimed to quantify implant wastage in T&O procedures at a Level 1 Major Trauma Centre in London, assessing both its frequency and financial impact.
Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all weekday T&O procedures performed between 1st December 2023 and 31st January 2024. Two of the authors identified wasted implants using intraoperative implant logbooks, and cross-referencing implant stickers with post-operative radiographs. Data pertaining to patient demographics, procedure types, surgical sites, and implant usage were collected. Cost analysis was performed using procurement data to determine the financial impact of implant wastage.
Results: Among 184 procedures analysed, 131 (71.2%) used implants, with wastage observed in 108 (82.4%) cases. A total of 141 implants were wasted, with screws accounting for 92.9% (n = 131) of wasted implants. Locking screws were the most frequently discarded (n = 65; 46.1%). Across ORIF and intramedullary nailing procedures, an overall screw wastage rate of 20% (17-31%) was observed with 2.4 screws wasted per trauma procedure. The financial cost of implant wastage over the 44-day study period amounted to approximately £335 per day and £136 per case.
Conclusion: This study highlights the substantial economic burden associated with implant wastage in T&O surgery, with screws, particularly locking screws, being the primary contributors. Targeted interventions, including improved preoperative planning, precision-based implant selection, and enhanced intraoperative decision-making, are essential to reducing waste and improving cost-efficiency and sustainability in surgical practices. Further research should explore the broader economic and environmental impact of implant wastage, incorporating factors such as operative time and carbon footprint to develop comprehensive waste-reduction strategies.
期刊介绍:
International Orthopaedics, the Official Journal of the Société Internationale de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie (SICOT) , publishes original papers from all over the world. The articles deal with clinical orthopaedic surgery or basic research directly connected with orthopaedic surgery. International Orthopaedics will also link all the members of SICOT by means of an insert that will be concerned with SICOT matters.
Finally, it is expected that news and information regarding all aspects of orthopaedic surgery, including meetings, panels, instructional courses, etc. will be brought to the attention of the readers.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted.
Reports of animal experiments must state that the "Principles of laboratory animal care" (NIH publication No. 85-23, revised 1985) were followed, as well as specific national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals) where applicable.
The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfil the above-mentioned requirements.