The Carbon Footprint of Peritoneal Dialysis in Australia

Scott McAlister,Ben Talbot,John Knight,Susan Blair,Forbes McGain,Stephen McDonald,Craig Nelson,Richard Knight,Katherine A. Barraclough
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1681/asn.0000000000000361
IF: 14.978
2024-04-26
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Abstract:Background: As climate change escalates with increasing health impacts, healthcare must address its carbon footprint. A critical first step is understanding the sources and extent of emissions from commonly utilised clinical care pathways. Methods: We used attributional process-based life cycle analysis to quantify CO 2 equivalent emissions associated with the delivery of Baxter home automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in Australia. Results: Annual per patient carbon emissions attributable to the manufacture and disposal of PD fluids and consumables were 1,992 kg CO 2 equivalent emissions for APD and 1,245 kg CO 2 equivalent emissions for CAPD. Transport impacts varied depending on the distance between site of manufacture of PD fluids and consumables and the home state of the patient. As a result, the total impact of providing PD also differed by Australian state, ranging from 2,350-4,503 kg CO 2 equivalent emissions for APD and from 1,455-2,716 kg CO 2 equivalent emissions for CAPD. Recycling of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) could reduce emissions by up to 14 per cent for APD and 30 per cent for CAPD, depending on the distance between the site of PVC waste generation and the recycling centre. Conclusions: This study demonstrated higher per patient carbon emissions from APD compared to CAPD, due to both higher fluid and consumable requirements, and the consequent higher transport impacts. PVC recycling can partially mitigate PD associated carbon emissions.
urology & nephrology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?