Environmental sustainability of clinical laboratories: A scoping review

Abstract

Introduction

The climate crisis presents a complex and growing challenge for healthcare systems around the world. Healthcare systems can contribute to substantial global emissions, with the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) alone responsible for 4%–5% of the country’s total carbon footprint. A wide range of clinical disciplines have already begun to assess and design interventions to tackle this issue. However, clinical and diagnostic laboratories remain underexplored.

Aims

What studies have been undertaken to assess and improve the environmental impact of clinical laboratories?

Methods

This scoping review undertook a multi-database search from date of inception to 5th February 2024. All primary studies that assessed the environmental outcomes of clinical laboratories were included. Studies were screened and data extracted by one reviewer with a 10% verification process at each stage. Studies were assessed based upon year of publication, geographical region, interconnectivity and area and type of clinical laboratory or test.

Findings

There has been some longstanding interest in understanding the environmental impact of clinical laboratories, and this field of investigation has gained popularity within the scholarly community in the last decade. Despite this recent increase in popularity there is a relatively limited number of intervention studies aimed at improving sustainability within clinical laboratories. Most research in this area originates from the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia, although the topic appears to be of global scholarly interest. There is limited interconnectivity of studies included in this review. Studies in this field have primarily been conducted at the clinical laboratory level, with a focus on quantifying waste in kilograms, measuring carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) emissions, and categorizing laboratory waste by type. To a lesser degree these outcomes have been assessed for specific clinical tests. Across both clinical laboratory and specific test assessments there is notable heterogeneity in both methods used, and areas explored.

Discussion

While this scoping review highlights a growing interest and awareness in this important field, the diversity of reported outcomes and the limited interconnectivity of studies indicate that it remains a developing area. The lack of consensus in methodologies and outcome measures suggests that establishing a baseline analysis remains a distant goal. Ideally, future efforts should prioritize improving the assessment of individual laboratory tests, fostering greater standardization, and enhancing repeatability to strengthen the reliability of environmental impact evaluations.