Elizabeth J Snyder, Cassandra L Thiel, Olesya Struk, Marta Vigil-Garcia, Cecilia Meijer, Josephine Gehrels, Reed A Omary, John R Scheel, Diana Elizabeth Carver
{"title":"射线照相和透视的潜在影响——环境生命周期评估。","authors":"Elizabeth J Snyder, Cassandra L Thiel, Olesya Struk, Marta Vigil-Garcia, Cecilia Meijer, Josephine Gehrels, Reed A Omary, John R Scheel, Diana Elizabeth Carver","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2025.09.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the environmental impact of radiography and fluoroscopy, using life cycle assessment (LCA), focusing on energy use and emissions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This ISO 14040-guided LCA-based study focused on radiography and fluoroscopy services, including the production and use of two radiography and two fluoroscopy machines, at a quaternary care 800-bed academic medical center in the Southeastern United States over a 1-year period. Data were collected through direct observation, record review, staff interviews, and energy metering. Environmental impacts were assessed using SimaPro 9.3.0.2 and the Ecoinvent v3.8 database.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Radiography and fluoroscopy activities generated an estimated 55,100 kilograms of CO<sub>2</sub> equivalents (kg CO<sub>2</sub>e) per year. Energy use was the main contributor (47%), with fluoroscopy having much higher per-scan emissions (4.8 and 9.6 kg CO<sub>2</sub>e per scan) than radiography (0.8 kg CO<sub>2</sub>e per scan). Medical linens or textiles accounted for 24% of total emissions. Other significant environmental impacts included ozone depletion, smog, acidification, and eutrophication.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Reducing energy consumption by decarbonizing electricity sources and optimizing equipment use can significantly decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Implementing sustainable practices in linen use, procurement, and end-of-life management is also crucial. Reducing low-value imaging can further mitigate environmental impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Hidden Impact of Radiography and Fluoroscopy-An Environmental Life Cycle Assessment.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth J Snyder, Cassandra L Thiel, Olesya Struk, Marta Vigil-Garcia, Cecilia Meijer, Josephine Gehrels, Reed A Omary, John R Scheel, Diana Elizabeth Carver\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jacr.2025.09.020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the environmental impact of radiography and fluoroscopy, using life cycle assessment (LCA), focusing on energy use and emissions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This ISO 14040-guided LCA-based study focused on radiography and fluoroscopy services, including the production and use of two radiography and two fluoroscopy machines, at a quaternary care 800-bed academic medical center in the Southeastern United States over a 1-year period. Data were collected through direct observation, record review, staff interviews, and energy metering. Environmental impacts were assessed using SimaPro 9.3.0.2 and the Ecoinvent v3.8 database.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Radiography and fluoroscopy activities generated an estimated 55,100 kilograms of CO<sub>2</sub> equivalents (kg CO<sub>2</sub>e) per year. Energy use was the main contributor (47%), with fluoroscopy having much higher per-scan emissions (4.8 and 9.6 kg CO<sub>2</sub>e per scan) than radiography (0.8 kg CO<sub>2</sub>e per scan). Medical linens or textiles accounted for 24% of total emissions. Other significant environmental impacts included ozone depletion, smog, acidification, and eutrophication.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Reducing energy consumption by decarbonizing electricity sources and optimizing equipment use can significantly decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Implementing sustainable practices in linen use, procurement, and end-of-life management is also crucial. Reducing low-value imaging can further mitigate environmental impact.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.09.020\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.09.020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Hidden Impact of Radiography and Fluoroscopy-An Environmental Life Cycle Assessment.
Objective: To assess the environmental impact of radiography and fluoroscopy, using life cycle assessment (LCA), focusing on energy use and emissions.
Methods: This ISO 14040-guided LCA-based study focused on radiography and fluoroscopy services, including the production and use of two radiography and two fluoroscopy machines, at a quaternary care 800-bed academic medical center in the Southeastern United States over a 1-year period. Data were collected through direct observation, record review, staff interviews, and energy metering. Environmental impacts were assessed using SimaPro 9.3.0.2 and the Ecoinvent v3.8 database.
Results: Radiography and fluoroscopy activities generated an estimated 55,100 kilograms of CO2 equivalents (kg CO2e) per year. Energy use was the main contributor (47%), with fluoroscopy having much higher per-scan emissions (4.8 and 9.6 kg CO2e per scan) than radiography (0.8 kg CO2e per scan). Medical linens or textiles accounted for 24% of total emissions. Other significant environmental impacts included ozone depletion, smog, acidification, and eutrophication.
Discussion: Reducing energy consumption by decarbonizing electricity sources and optimizing equipment use can significantly decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Implementing sustainable practices in linen use, procurement, and end-of-life management is also crucial. Reducing low-value imaging can further mitigate environmental impact.