Examines sustainability levels of green hospital practices in psychiatric hospitals, suggesting improvements for efficiency.
Implementation of the green hospital concept is imperative in achieving sustainable healthcare delivery systems, but there is still a lack of empirical studies in the case of psychiatric hospitals. This research seeks to examine the level of sustainability of green hospital implementation at tampan psychiatric hospital through the multidimensional approach. Data were obtained from five experts through questionnaires, observation, and instrumentations that are developed based on the Indonesian Green Hospital Model (IPMGH). MDS–RAP green hospital was used to analyze the sustainability of performance along with AHP to compute the weight of each dimension. Robustness of the methodology has been ensured through stress value, coefficient of determination (R²), Monte Carlo simulation, and AHP consistency ratio. The results show that ecological (42.29%), technological (37.70%), environmental health (46.68%), and institutional (47.95%) dimensions are unsustainable while economic (52.65%) and social (50.72%) dimensions are moderately sustainable. Leverage analysis reveals the priority attributes such as hazardous waste management, energy efficiency, environmental service satisfaction, water conservation technology, health promotion, and environmental documentation. It can be concluded that the sustainability implementation at a psychiatric hospital is constrained by infrastructural problem, technological limitation, and poor governance. Practically, Priority interventions would include better waste management systems, greater energy and water efficiency, improved environmental health programs, and incorporating sustainable indicators in the management of the hospitals. This paper will offer a sustainability assessment model for a specific environment and will provide evidence-based recommendations to enhance the performance of Green Hospitals while at the same time aligning with SDGs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hutomo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: