IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i12p5320-d1674911.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simple Steps Towards Sustainability in Healthcare: A Narrative Review of Life Cycle Assessments of Single-Use Medical Devices (SUDs) and Third-Party SUD Reprocessing

Author

Listed:
  • Cassandra L. Thiel

    (Departments of Population Health & Ophthalmology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY 10016, USA
    Clinically Sustainable Consulting LLC, Middleton, WI 53562, USA)

  • David Sheon

    (Association of Medical Device Reprocessors, 2000 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 4003, Washington, DC 20006, USA)

  • Daniel J. Vukelich

    (Association of Medical Device Reprocessors, 2000 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 4003, Washington, DC 20006, USA)

Abstract

This study reviews life cycle assessments (LCAs) of reprocessed single-use devices (rSUDs) in healthcare to quantify their greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions compared to original equipment manufacturer (OEM) SUDs (single-use devices). rSUDs offer notable reductions in solid waste generation, but, until recently, a reduction in greenhouse gases and other emissions from the reprocessing process was only hypothesized. Emerging LCAs in this space can help validate the assumptions of better environmental performance from greater circularity in the medical device industry. Four LCAs analyzing eight devices found consistent and significant GHG reductions ranging from 23% to 60% with rSUD use. Primary data from rSUD manufacturers were utilized in all studies, with SimaPro v9.3.0.2 and Ecoinvent v3.8 being the predominant LCA software and database. Raw material extraction and production dominated SUD emissions, while electricity use and packaging materials were key contributors for rSUDs. Sensitivity analyses highlighted the influence of electricity sources, collection rates, and reprocessing yields on rSUD environmental performance. A comparison with economic input–output-based models revealed an alignment at the time between price differentials and LCA-derived GHG differences, though this may not always hold true. This review demonstrates the substantial environmental benefits of rSUDs, supporting their role as a readily achievable step towards more sustainable and circular healthcare systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Cassandra L. Thiel & David Sheon & Daniel J. Vukelich, 2025. "Simple Steps Towards Sustainability in Healthcare: A Narrative Review of Life Cycle Assessments of Single-Use Medical Devices (SUDs) and Third-Party SUD Reprocessing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5320-:d:1674911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5320/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5320/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernhard Steubing & Arjan de Koning & Stefano Merciai & Arnold Tukker, 2022. "How do carbon footprints from LCA and EEIOA databases compare? A comparison of ecoinvent and EXIOBASE," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(4), pages 1406-1422, August.
    2. Guillaume Majeau-Bettez & Richard Wood & Edgar G. Hertwich & Anders Hammer Strømman, 2016. "When Do Allocations and Constructs Respect Material, Energy, Financial, and Production Balances in LCA and EEIO?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(1), pages 67-84, February.
    3. Brian Morris & Jenna Tauber & Anvit Rai & Cassandra Thiel & Tiana J. Geringer & Umar K. Mian, 2024. "Waste and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Produced from Ophthalmic Surgeries: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga & Nils Thonemann, 2021. "Combining Life Cycle Assessment and Circularity Assessment to Analyze Environmental Impacts of the Medical Remanufacturing of Electrophysiology Catheters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, January.
    5. Catherine Lalman & Hirushie Karunathilake & Rajeev Ruparathna, 2023. "To Dispose or to Reuse? Analyzing the Life Cycle Impacts and Costs of Disposal, Sterilization, and Reuse of Electrophysiological Catheters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Golinucci, Nicolò & Tonini, Francesco & Rocco, Matteo Vincenzo & Colombo, Emanuela, 2023. "Towards BitCO2, an individual consumption-based carbon emission reduction mechanism," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    2. Matthias Schlipf & Bastian Striegl & Tobias Gaugler, 2024. "Climate true‐cost analysis of industrial goods and its regulatory implications on value chains and global competition," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(3), pages 589-602, June.
    3. Edgar Battand Towa Kouokam & Vanessa Zeller & Wouter Achten, 2019. "Input-output models and waste management analysis: A critical review," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/359535, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Ornella Benedettini, 2022. "Green Servitization in the Single-Use Medical Device Industry: How Device OEMs Create Supply Chain Circularity through Reprocessing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-21, October.
    5. Catherine Lalman & Hirushie Karunathilake & Rajeev Ruparathna, 2023. "To Dispose or to Reuse? Analyzing the Life Cycle Impacts and Costs of Disposal, Sterilization, and Reuse of Electrophysiological Catheters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, March.
    6. Carlos Pablo Sigüenza & Bernhard Steubing & Arnold Tukker & Glenn A. Aguilar‐Hernández, 2021. "The environmental and material implications of circular transitions: A diffusion and product‐life‐cycle‐based modeling framework," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(3), pages 563-579, June.
    7. Enrico Mariutti, 2025. "The Limits of the Current Consensus Regarding the Carbon Footprint of Photovoltaic Modules Manufactured in China: A Review and Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-16, February.
    8. Jingwei Han & Zhixiong Tan & Maozhi Chen & Liang Zhao & Ling Yang & Siying Chen, 2022. "Carbon Footprint Research Based on Input–Output Model—A Global Scientometric Visualization Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-23, September.
    9. Michael Saidani & Harrison Kim, 2022. "Nexus Between Life Cycle Assessment, Circularity, and Sustainability Indicators—Part I: a Review," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 1143-1156, September.
    10. Hanspeter Wieland & Stefan Giljum & Nina Eisenmenger & Dominik Wiedenhofer & Martin Bruckner & Anke Schaffartzik & Anne Owen, 2020. "Supply versus use designs of environmental extensions in input–output analysis: Conceptual and empirical implications for the case of energy," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(3), pages 548-563, June.
    11. Hadji-Lazaro, Paul, 2025. "Environmental responsibility and exposure of finance: Combining environmentally-extended input-output and balance sheet approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    12. De Nicolò, Michele & Fraccascia, Luca & Pontrandolfo, Pierpaolo, 2024. "How the energy procurement switching strategies (driven by the Russia-Ukraine conflict) impact the global sustainability? The global sustainability dashboard," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    13. Reinout Heijungs & Arjan Koning, 2019. "Analyzing the effects of the choice of model in the context of marginal changes in final demand," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 8(1), pages 1-22, December.
    14. Soo Huey Teh & Thomas Wiedmann & Stephen Moore, 2018. "Mixed-unit hybrid life cycle assessment applied to the recycling of construction materials," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 7(1), pages 1-25, December.
    15. Erik Roos Lindgreen & Katelin Opferkuch & Anna M. Walker & Roberta Salomone & Tatiana Reyes & Andrea Raggi & Alberto Simboli & Walter J. V. Vermeulen & Sandra Caeiro, 2022. "Exploring assessment practices of companies actively engaged with circular economy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1414-1438, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5320-:d:1674911. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.