SP 5.12 Surgical Set Rationalisation at a District General Hospital: Improves Sustainability whilst Saving Time, Money, Space and Energy
Clicks: 3
ID: 324075
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.6
/100
3 views
2 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #385 of 432 articles by views in the british journal of surgery
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 432 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Aims Surgical instrument reprocessing is a major contributor to theatre-related carbon emissions. This project evaluated general surgery instrument sets at Musgrove Park Hospital to identify unnecessary instruments, streamline set design and quantify environmental and operational benefits. Methods Three core general surgery sets (Minor, Laparotomy and Basic General) were audited. Surgeons, scrub staff and instrument specialists performed visual inspection to identify rarely used items for removal. Reductions in reprocessing volume and associated carbon impact were estimated using instrument counts. Results Instrument volumes were reduced across all sets: • Minor: from 41 to 31 instruments per set (−24%), removing 30 instruments overall. • Laparotomy: from 88 to 77 instruments per set (−13%), removing 110 instruments overall. • Basic General: from 81 to 56 instruments per set (−31%), removing 425 instruments overall. 565 instruments were removed, representing a 22% reduction across general surgery sets (from 2,380 to 1,815 instruments). This reduces reprocessing demand, energy use, water consumption and detergent requirements. Fewer instruments per set shortens assembly and checking times, improving workflow efficiency and reducing staff burden. Combined with concurrent orthopaedic set rationalisation, time-and-motion analysis demonstrated reprocessing time savings equivalent to 221 twelve-hour shifts, delivering £119,000 labour savings. Annual carbon reductions were estimated at 69,346 kg CO₂—equivalent to removing 22 petrol cars from the road for one year. Conclusions Rationalising general surgery sets delivers meaningful environmental and operational gains. Removing rarely used instruments reduces reprocessing workload and carbon emissions while maintaining surgical capability. Even modest reductions across commonly used sets can generate substantial sustainability benefits.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7172511194
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | M J Claxton, Sophie Forster, Louise Skidmore, Christopher Hepworth, Andrew Stevenson, Marianne Hollyman |
| Journal | the british journal of surgery |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/bjs/znag087.071
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.