Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T21:25:09.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

VP108 Environmental Sustainability In Hospitals Health Technology Assessment - A Survey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2018

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
INTRODUCTION:

In the age of limited resources, hospital managers confront the need to strictly balance resource allocation at their disposal between drugs, wages, purchases and operation costs. This entails an endless search for creative pathways to efficiently merge the trends to preserve the environment.

A “green” hospital is an entity that is planned, built and operated so as to minimize the ‘ecological footprint’: for example, saving energy by utilizing natural light; recycling water, paper or waste; and using insulation and soundproofing (1).

‘Evidence-based environmental design’, a new approach to advanced building techniques, is gaining momentum worldwide. It synergizes with additional trends: promoting quality, improving potential utility, raising the accountability of hospital workers and involving the public and patients in overcoming health system dilemmas.

The aim was to analyze the standpoints of professionals in health and architecture regarding environmental accountability, in comparison to public opinion, and enhance the dialogue between these three groups to create wise decision making toward improvements in the health system.

METHODS:

A structured questionnaire was prepared to examine environmental responsibility, focusing on hospital contours. The questionnaire was distributed among three groups to be completed anonymously: hospital employees (physicians and medical managers), professionals from the field of architecture and the general public. The distribution was via the internet and to the general public through a social network using the “snowball” mechanism.

RESULTS:

Distribution of the survey raised debates on the subject. We compared the views of 178 respondents (80 healthcare professionals, 47 from the field of architecture and 51 from the general public). Demographic and other criteria included age, gender, profession, priority setting, concepts of environmental responsibility and social values. Physicians prioritized economic factors as the main barrier (more than architects or the general public) and marked internal incentives as key factors. Environmental responsibility correlated with high quality of care and service among healthcare workers.

CONCLUSIONS:

Logistics and physical infrastructure interventions can enhance economic effectiveness. Moreso, they can initiate social and environmental responsibility and increase the level of confidentiality regarding the accountability of their managers towards quality-targeted work surroundings.

Type
Vignette Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

References

REFERENCES:

1. Sadler, BL, Joseph, A, Keller, A, Rostenberg, B. Using Evidence-Based Environmental Design to Enhance Safety and Quality. IHI Innovation Series white paper. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2009. Available on www.IHI.orgGoogle Scholar