Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Surgical headwear is designed to maintain sterility and prevent microbial contamination. However, the environmental impact of the healthcare industry carries an obligation to develop sustainable alternatives. We aim to explore the environmental impact and safety of reusable surgical headwear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library until December 10, 2023. Studies were reviewed for suitability and risk of bias using the ROBINS-I tool, with the results aggregated using Review Manager Version 5.4 for odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and the I2 was used to assess heterogeneity. This systematic review included nine studies, and the meta-analysis included six studies involving 45,708 procedural cases. There was no significant difference in surgical site infection (SSI) rates between the reusable and disposable groups (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.59-1.07; P=0.13). Policy implementation did not affect SSI rates (OR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.85-1.73; P=0.30). Reusable surgical head covers demonstrated a significantly lower carbon footprint (P<0.001), ozone depletion (P<0.005), fossil fuel depletion (P<0.005), terrestrial acidification (P<0.005), and fine particulate matter formation (P<0.005) than disposable alternatives. Reusable surgical headwear matches disposable options for SSI incidence and offers environmental advantages. These findings support a shift towards reusable alternatives in healthcare, aligning patient safety with ecological responsibility. By adopting reusable alternatives, healthcare systems can actively contribute to planetary health, thereby highlighting the significant role of sustainable practices in modern medical settings.
Gumera et al. (Mon,) studied this question.