Comparative Life Cycle Assessment Between Single-Use and Reprocessed IPC Sleeves.

Purpose: Healthcare has a large environmental footprint, not least due to the wide use of single-use supplies. Reprocessing of medical devices is a well-established, regulated process, and can reduce its environmental impact. This life cycle assessment (LCA) compares the environmental footprint of a single-use and a reprocessed version of otherwise identical intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) sleeves. Materials and Methods: The LCA was performed in accordance with the international standard ISO 14044 using the Environmental Footprint 3.0 (EF) method for the assessment. Data were obtained in cooperation with IPC sleeve manufacturers. Where no primary data were available, ecoinvent database records were used. The functional unit is five hospital treatments applying IPC. The robustness of the results was interrogated in sensitivity analyses of the energy mix, the ethylene oxide emissions during reprocessing, and the transport distances. The impact of waste reduction on hospital disposal costs was calculated. Results: The environmental footprint of reprocessed IPC sleeves was found to be reduced in all categories compared to single-use devices, leading to a weighted normalized reduction of 43% across all categories. In a breakdown of the LCA results, reprocessed IPC sleeves were found to reduce the carbon footprint by 40%, with the treatment of five patients with single-use IPC sleeves creating 7 kg CO2eq, compared to 4.2 kg CO2eq from reprocessed sleeves. Waste disposal costs were also reduced by 90%. Conclusion: Reprocessing of IPC sleeves provides an environmental and economic benefit in comparison to single-use devices.

Patterns of care and follow-up care of patients with uveal melanoma in German-speaking countries: a multinational survey of the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG).

PURPOSE: Uveal melanoma (UM) is an orphan cancer of high unmet medical need. Current patterns of care and surveillance remain unclear as they are situated in an interdisciplinary setting. METHODS: A questionnaire addressing the patterns of care and surveillance in the management of patients with uveal melanoma was distributed to 70 skin cancer centers in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Frequency distributions of responses for each item of the questionnaire were calculated. RESULTS: 44 of 70 (62.9%) skin cancer centers completed the questionnaire. Thirty-nine hospitals were located in Germany (88.6%), three in Switzerland (6.8%) and two in Austria (4.5%). The majority (68.2%) represented university hospitals. Most patients with metastatic disease were treated in certified skin cancer centers (70.7%, 29/41). Besides, the majority of patients with UM were referred to the respective skin cancer center by ophthalmologists (87.2%, 34/39). Treatment and organization of follow-up of patients varied across the different centers. 35.1% (14/37) of the centers stated to not perform any screening measures. CONCLUSION: Treatment patterns of patients with uveal melanoma in Germany, Austria and Switzerland remain extremely heterogeneous. A guideline for the treatment and surveillance is urgently needed.

S2k Guidelines for Cutaneous Basal Cell Carcinoma - Part 2: Treatment, Prevention and Follow-up.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common malignant tumor among fair-skinned individuals, and its incidence had been steadily rising in the past decades. In order to maintain the highest quality of patient care possible, the German S2k guidelines were updated following a systematic literature search and with the participation of all professional societies and associations involved in the management of the disease. Part 2 addresses issues such as proper risk stratification, the various therapeutic approaches, and prevention as well as follow-up of patients with basal cell carcinoma.