Absorbent mats, abundantly used in hospitals, are integral to maintaining hygiene and cleanliness by effectively collecting and retaining patient's bodily fluids. absorbent mats are available as disposable and reusable products. In the Netherlands, predominantly disposable products are used, and approximately 23 million absorbent mats are employed each year. The abundant use contributes to the Dutch healthcare sector’s substantial impact to the country’s greenhouse gas emissions, waste generation, material extraction, water consumption, and land use. Hospitals and policy makers within the healthcare sector striving to implement environmentally sustainable practices, require current data for informed decision-making. Yet, only two studies have determined the environmental impact of absorbent mats; however, critical environmental metrics are lacking and detail on the contributions of life cycle stages are insufficient. This study addresses these issues by conducting a comparative Life Cycle Assessment, examining eighteen environmental metrics of both disposable and reusable absorbent mats. The primary objective is to not only assess the environmental impact across all their life cycle stages but also to facilitate the redesign of these absorbent mats to reduce their environmental impact. An in-depth cradle-to-grave Life cycle Assessment, utilizing the ReCiPe impact assessment method, was conducted to compare and evaluate the environmental impact of three different disposable absorbent mats and one reusable absorbent mat. The identification of major contributors to their environmental impact, combined with the application of eco-design strategies, facilitated the sustainable absorbent mat redesign. The Life Cycle Assessment findings indicate that reusable absorbent mats are environmentally superior compared to their disposable counterparts, even if the impact of disposable absorbent mats is mitigated by sustainable product redesign. The reusable absorbent mat demonstrates a lower environmental impact score in fifteen out of eighteen environmental metrics when compared to the disposable absorbent mats. The environmental impact of absorbent mats is largest in the use stage for reusable absorbent mats, and in the material production and manufacturing stage for disposable absorbent mats. The redesigned disposable and reusable absorbent mat concepts exhibit a reduced environmental impact, among other factors, attributed to product recycling. Both concepts facilitate recycling by utilizing a single material for the entire absorbent mat, namely wood-derived materials for the disposable redesign and polyethylene terephthalate-derived materials for the reusable redesign. This study has demonstrated the versatility of Life Cycle Assessment in aiding informed decisions-making and providing valuable insights for sustainable product redesign. The outcomes of the Life Cycle Assessment suggest that hospitals should transition to the use of reusable absorbent mats. Furthermore, the redesign findings offer valuable insights into the environmental benefits achievable through the recycling of medical products.

Climate change is a large and global concern. The healthcare sector contributes between 6% and 10% to national carbon emissions in developed countries. Within the healthcare sector, operation rooms are very resource-intensive. A lot of energy, medical products, equipment and pharmaceuticals are required to perform surgery on a daily basis. This report explores methods to calculate the carbon footprint of Dutch operation rooms. Based on these, a tool is developed to calculate total carbon footprint and identify contributing processes. A data collection trial is completed during this development, identifying difficulties in the data collection and calculation process as well as generating some emission results. A tool is designed from the results of this trial. It is based on life cycle analysis, while also including emission factors calculated from sector carbon disclosures. Differences from either one of these carbon emission calculation methods are evaluated and if possible, compared. A final selection of calculation methods for each process is selected and used in the tool. The tool is capable of both internally monitoring carbon emissions over different time periods and comparing emission results with other hospitals. Both these functions can be used to identify emission hotspots, inspire improvements and monitor changes in emissions. Sensitivity of the model to different characterization methods and scope definitions is tested. Ultimately, this tool is aimed to aid in reducing CO2-eq emissions within operation rooms. Recommendations are made to further improve this tool and its data collection procedure.