Assesses the environmental and economic impacts of cefotaxime and ceftriaxone in hospitals, highlighting the need for updated stewardship policies.
CONTEXT: While health-related carbon emissions are a recognizably increasing concern, the environmental impacts of choosing cefotaxime over ceftriaxone have yet to be assessed on a hospital-wide scale. METHODS: We collected data on antibiotic consumption from 38 university hospitals in 2023. Using the new Carebone® tool, the respective carbon footprints of antibiotics and medical devices were calculated by life cycle assessment. RESULTS: Daily cefotaxime administration (1 g q8h) generates 5.40 kgCO₂eq (±48%), costs €5.5, and produces 274 g of waste, compared with 1.78 kgCO₂eq (±48%), €1.4, and 88 g of waste from ceftriaxone (1 g q24h). Seven hospitals have already implemented policies replacing ceftriaxone with cefotaxime. Similar policies in all 38 hospitals participating in the survey would annually generate 392,543 kgCO₂eq, 20 tons of waste and an additional cost of €440,713. Conversely, replacing cefotaxime with ceftriaxone could save 436,579 kgCO₂e, 22 tons of waste and €490,154 annually. CONCLUSIONS: Policies favoring cefotaxime have environmental and economic costs that should be integrated into antibiotic stewardship recommendations alongside other factors (resistance selection, etc.).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raphael et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: