Cataract Surgery Carbon Footprint: A Comparison Of Eyeefficiency, Zasti Atom, And Sidics Calculators

The healthcare sector contributes significantly to global carbon emissions, with surgical procedures being a notable component. Cataract surgery is one of the most common procedure performed worldwide and there is a growing need to accurately assess and minimize its carbon footprint. This study aimed to compare the carbon footprint calculations of cataract surgery using four distinct calculators: Eyeefficiency, Zasti ATOM Advanced, Zasti ATOM Lite, and SIDICS. 

Data were collected at Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells Hospital, a National Health Service (NHS) Trust in the United Kingdom. This setting represents a typical high-volume ophthalmology department within a public healthcare system, providing a real-world context for evaluating carbon footprint calculators

We utilized Eyeefficiency, Zasti ATOM Advanced, Zasti ATOM Lite, and SIDICS to calculate the carbon footprint of cataract surgery. The calculators were populated with relevant data pertaining to surgical procedures, including energy consumption, material usage, and waste generation. The resulting carbon footprint values were then compared, and the parameters used by each calculator were analyzed to understand the sources of variation in the calculations.

The calculated carbon footprint per cataract surgery varied across the calculators. Eyeefficiency reported a value of 695.47 kgCO2e, Zasti ATOM Advanced reported 666.92 kgCO2e, and Zasti ATOM Lite reported 666.86 kgCO2e. SIDICS calculated a total CO₂ footprint of 40,336 kg CO₂ per year for cataract packs alone. Eyeefficiency assesses a wide range of parameters, including time and motion studies, service information, appointment patterns, staff details, building and energy, theatre equipment, waste disposal, consumables, reusables, and surgical linen. 

This study demonstrates that different carbon footprint calculators for cataract surgery yield varying results. The differences are likely due to variations in the data input parameters and calculation methodologies. his comparison provides a crucial step towards standardizing carbon footprint assessments in ophthalmology and facilitating informed decision-making for sustainable surgical practices.