COMPARISON OF WASTE GENERATED BY FOUR HAEMODIALYSIS MACHINES COMMONLY USED IN AUSTRALIA

Dr ADRINA BENEDICT1,2,3, DR RATHIKA KRISHNASAMY2,3, DR JANE WAUGH2,3

1Princess Alexandria Hospital, Brisbane, Australia, 2Sunshine Coast University Hospital, , Australia, 3Griffith University, , Australia

Biography:

Jane Waugh is a nephrologist on the Sunshine Coast and co-chair of the ANZSN's Environmental Sustainability Committee

Aim:

In Australia, four companies supply haemodialysis machines and consumables (bloodlines, bicarbonate and acid for dialysate production). This study aimed to compare the quantity and types of annual waste generated through use of four different haemodialysis machines.

Background:

Haemodialysis consumables produces waste, but the type and quantity varies by provider. Understanding waste generated by different dialysis machines may help dialysis units nationwide make informed, environmentally conscious procurement decisions.

Methods:

This project compared four haemodialysis machines available in Australia; the B.Braun Dialog iQ, Fresenius 5008, Nipro Surdial-X, and Vantive Artis Physio. Excluding dialysers and needles, the waste generated from single-use products and their packaging was weighed twice and categorised by type of waste for comparison. Type of waste was defined by recyclable (paper or plastic) and non-recyclable (landfill and clinical waste requiring energy-intense processing). The data was extrapolated to determine estimated annual waste generation from dialysing one patient, assuming three haemodialysis sessions per week for 52 weeks.

Results:

In order of quantity, the total amount of annual estimated waste produced by Nipro Surdial-X was 99.9 kilograms (kg) (non-recyclable = 64.2kg), Vantive Artis Physio was 91.9kg (non-recyclable = 90.2kg), B.Braun Dialog iQ was 78.4 kg (non-recyclable = 57.0kg) and Fresenius 5008 was 64.8kg (non-recyclable = 63.6kg). The estimated recyclable waste was 35.7% for Nipro Surdial-X and 27.3% for B.Braun Dialog iQ and less than 2% for both Vantive Artis Physio and Fresenius 5008. Clinical waste produced was similar between all machines.

Conclusion:

Types and quantity of waste generated by haemodialysis treatments differ significantly between companies and should be a consideration in procurement decisions.

 

Categories