critical thinking icu

The Value of Critical Thinking in Nursing

• How Nurses Use Critical Thinking
• How to Improve Critical Thinking
• Common Mistakes

Some experts describe a person’s ability to question belief systems, test previously held assumptions, and recognize ambiguity as evidence of critical thinking. Others identify specific skills that demonstrate critical thinking, such as the ability to identify problems and biases, infer and draw conclusions, and determine the relevance of information to a situation.

Nicholas McGowan, BSN, RN, CCRN, has been a critical care nurse for 10 years in neurological trauma nursing and cardiovascular and surgical intensive care. He defines critical thinking as “necessary for problem-solving and decision-making by healthcare providers. It is a process where people use a logical process to gather information and take purposeful action based on their evaluation.”

“This cognitive process is vital for excellent patient outcomes because it requires that nurses make clinical decisions utilizing a variety of different lenses, such as fairness, ethics, and evidence-based practice,” he says.

How Do Nurses Use Critical Thinking?

Successful nurses think beyond their assigned tasks to deliver excellent care for their patients. For example, a nurse might be tasked with changing a wound dressing, delivering medications, and monitoring vital signs during a shift. However, it requires critical thinking skills to understand how a difference in the wound may affect blood pressure and temperature and when those changes may require immediate medical intervention.

Nurses care for many patients during their shifts. Strong critical thinking skills are crucial when juggling various tasks so patient safety and care are not compromised.

Jenna Liphart Rhoads, Ph.D., RN, is a nurse educator with a clinical background in surgical-trauma adult critical care, where critical thinking and action were essential to the safety of her patients. She talks about examples of critical thinking in a healthcare environment, saying:

“Nurses must also critically think to determine which patient to see first, which medications to pass first, and the order in which to organize their day caring for patients. Patient conditions and environments are continually in flux, therefore nurses must constantly be evaluating and re-evaluating information they gather (assess) to keep their patients safe.”

The COVID-19 pandemic created hospital care situations where critical thinking was essential. It was expected of the nurses on the general floor and in intensive care units. Crystal Slaughter is an advanced practice nurse in the intensive care unit (ICU) and a nurse educator. She observed critical thinking throughout the pandemic as she watched intensive care nurses test the boundaries of previously held beliefs and master providing excellent care while preserving resources.

“Nurses are at the patient’s bedside and are often the first ones to detect issues. Then, the nurse needs to gather the appropriate subjective and objective data from the patient in order to frame a concise problem statement or question for the physician or advanced practice provider,” she explains.

Top 5 Ways Nurses Can Improve Critical Thinking Skills

We asked our experts for the top five strategies nurses can use to purposefully improve their critical thinking skills.

Case-Based Approach

Slaughter is a fan of the case-based approach to learning critical thinking skills.

In much the same way a detective would approach a mystery, she mentors her students to ask questions about the situation that help determine the information they have and the information they need. “What is going on? What information am I missing? Can I get that information? What does that information mean for the patient? How quickly do I need to act?”

Consider forming a group and working with a mentor who can guide you through case studies. This provides you with a learner-centered environment in which you can analyze data to reach conclusions and develop communication, analytical, and collaborative skills with your colleagues.

Practice Self-Reflection

Rhoads is an advocate for self-reflection. “Nurses should reflect upon what went well or did not go well in their workday and identify areas of improvement or situations in which they should have reached out for help.” Self-reflection is a form of personal analysis to observe and evaluate situations and how you responded.

This gives you the opportunity to discover mistakes you may have made and to establish new behavior patterns that may help you make better decisions. You likely already do this. For example, after a disagreement or contentious meeting, you may go over the conversation in your head and think about ways you could have responded.

It’s important to go through the decisions you made during your day and determine if you should have gotten more information before acting or if you could have asked better questions.

During self-reflection, you may try thinking about the problem in reverse. This may not give you an immediate answer, but can help you see the situation with fresh eyes and a new perspective. How would the outcome of the day be different if you planned the dressing change in reverse with the assumption you would find a wound infection? How does this information change your plan for the next dressing change?

Develop a Questioning Mind

McGowan has learned that “critical thinking is a self-driven process. It isn’t something that can simply be taught. Rather, it is something that you practice and cultivate with experience. To develop critical thinking skills, you have to be curious and inquisitive.”

To gain critical thinking skills, you must undergo a purposeful process of learning strategies and using them consistently so they become a habit. One of those strategies is developing a questioning mind. Meaningful questions lead to useful answers and are at the core of critical thinking .

However, learning to ask insightful questions is a skill you must develop. Faced with staff and nursing shortages , declining patient conditions, and a rising number of tasks to be completed, it may be difficult to do more than finish the task in front of you. Yet, questions drive active learning and train your brain to see the world differently and take nothing for granted.

It is easier to practice questioning in a non-stressful, quiet environment until it becomes a habit. Then, in the moment when your patient’s care depends on your ability to ask the right questions, you can be ready to rise to the occasion.

Practice Self-Awareness in the Moment

Critical thinking in nursing requires self-awareness and being present in the moment. During a hectic shift, it is easy to lose focus as you struggle to finish every task needed for your patients. Passing medication, changing dressings, and hanging intravenous lines all while trying to assess your patient’s mental and emotional status can affect your focus and how you manage stress as a nurse .

Staying present helps you to be proactive in your thinking and anticipate what might happen, such as bringing extra lubricant for a catheterization or extra gloves for a dressing change.

By staying present, you are also better able to practice active listening. This raises your assessment skills and gives you more information as a basis for your interventions and decisions.

Use a Process

As you are developing critical thinking skills, it can be helpful to use a process. For example:

• Ask questions.
• Gather information.
• Implement a strategy.
• Evaluate the results.
• Consider another point of view.

These are the fundamental steps of the nursing process (assess, diagnose, plan, implement, evaluate). The last step will help you overcome one of the common problems of critical thinking in nursing — personal bias.

Common Critical Thinking Pitfalls in Nursing

Your brain uses a set of processes to make inferences about what’s happening around you. In some cases, your unreliable biases can lead you down the wrong path. McGowan places personal biases at the top of his list of common pitfalls to critical thinking in nursing.

“We all form biases based on our own experiences. However, nurses have to learn to separate their own biases from each patient encounter to avoid making false assumptions that may interfere with their care,” he says. Successful critical thinkers accept they have personal biases and learn to look out for them. Awareness of your biases is the first step to understanding if your personal bias is contributing to the wrong decision.

New nurses may be overwhelmed by the transition from academics to clinical practice, leading to a task-oriented mindset and a common new nurse mistake ; this conflicts with critical thinking skills.

“Consider a patient whose blood pressure is low but who also needs to take a blood pressure medication at a scheduled time. A task-oriented nurse may provide the medication without regard for the patient’s blood pressure because medication administration is a task that must be completed,” Slaughter says. “A nurse employing critical thinking skills would address the low blood pressure, review the patient’s blood pressure history and trends, and potentially call the physician to discuss whether medication should be withheld.”

Fear and pride may also stand in the way of developing critical thinking skills. Your belief system and worldview provide comfort and guidance, but this can impede your judgment when you are faced with an individual whose belief system or cultural practices are not the same as yours. Fear or pride may prevent you from pursuing a line of questioning that would benefit the patient. Nurses with strong critical thinking skills exhibit:

• Learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of other nurses
• Look forward to integrating changes that improve patient care
• Treat each patient interaction as a part of a whole
• Evaluate new events based on past knowledge and adjust decision-making as needed
• Solve problems with their colleagues
• Are self-confident
• Acknowledge biases and seek to ensure these do not impact patient care

An Essential Skill for All Nurses

Critical thinking in nursing protects patient health and contributes to professional development and career advancement. Administrative and clinical nursing leaders are required to have strong critical thinking skills to be successful in their positions.

By using the strategies in this guide during your daily life and in your nursing role, you can intentionally improve your critical thinking abilities and be rewarded with better patient outcomes and potential career advancement.

Frequently Asked Questions About Critical Thinking in Nursing

How are critical thinking skills utilized in nursing practice.

Nursing practice utilizes critical thinking skills to provide the best care for patients. Often, the patient’s cause of pain or health issue is not immediately clear. Nursing professionals need to use their knowledge to determine what might be causing distress, collect vital information, and make quick decisions on how best to handle the situation.

How does nursing school develop critical thinking skills?

Nursing school gives students the knowledge professional nurses use to make important healthcare decisions for their patients. Students learn about diseases, anatomy, and physiology, and how to improve the patient’s overall well-being. Learners also participate in supervised clinical experiences, where they practice using their critical thinking skills to make decisions in professional settings.

Do only nurse managers use critical thinking?

Nurse managers certainly use critical thinking skills in their daily duties. But when working in a health setting, anyone giving care to patients uses their critical thinking skills. Everyone — including licensed practical nurses, registered nurses, and advanced nurse practitioners —needs to flex their critical thinking skills to make potentially life-saving decisions.

Meet Our Contributors

Crystal Slaughter, DNP, APRN, ACNS-BC, CNE

Crystal Slaughter is a core faculty member in Walden University’s RN-to-BSN program. She has worked as an advanced practice registered nurse with an intensivist/pulmonary service to provide care to hospitalized ICU patients and in inpatient palliative care. Slaughter’s clinical interests lie in nursing education and evidence-based practice initiatives to promote improving patient care.

Jenna Liphart Rhoads, Ph.D., RN

Jenna Liphart Rhoads is a nurse educator and freelance author and editor. She earned a BSN from Saint Francis Medical Center College of Nursing and an MS in nursing education from Northern Illinois University. Rhoads earned a Ph.D. in education with a concentration in nursing education from Capella University where she researched the moderation effects of emotional intelligence on the relationship of stress and GPA in military veteran nursing students. Her clinical background includes surgical-trauma adult critical care, interventional radiology procedures, and conscious sedation in adult and pediatric populations.

Nicholas McGowan, BSN, RN, CCRN

Nicholas McGowan is a critical care nurse with 10 years of experience in cardiovascular, surgical intensive care, and neurological trauma nursing. McGowan also has a background in education, leadership, and public speaking. He is an online learner who builds on his foundation of critical care nursing, which he uses directly at the bedside where he still practices. In addition, McGowan hosts an online course at Critical Care Academy where he helps nurses achieve critical care (CCRN) certification.

LOGIN 

Annual Report

• Board of Directors
• Nomination Process
• Organizational Structure
• ATS Policies
• ATS Website
• MyATS Tutorial
• ATS Experts
• Press Releases

Member Newsletters

• ATS in the News
• ATS Conference News
• Embargo Policy

ATS Social Media

Breathe easy podcasts, ethics & coi, health equity, industry resources.

• Value of Collaboration
• Corporate Members
• Advertising Opportunities
• Clinical Trials
• Financial Disclosure

In Memoriam

Global health.

• International Trainee Scholarships (ITS)
• MECOR Program
• Forum of International Respiratory Societies (FIRS)
• 2019 Latin American Critical Care Conference

Peer Organizations

Careers at ats, affordable care act, ats comments and testimony, forum of international respiratory societies, tobacco control, tuberculosis, washington letter, clinical resources.

• ATS Quick Hits
• Asthma Center

Best of ATS Video Lecture Series

• Coronavirus
• Critical Care
• Disaster Related Resources
• Disease Related Resources
• Resources for Patients
• Resources for Practices
• Vaccine Resource Center

Career Development

• Resident & Medical Students
• Junior Faculty
• Training Program Directors
• ATS Reading List
• ATS Scholarships
• ATS Virtual Network

ATS Podcasts

Ats webinars, professional accreditation, pulmonary function testing (pft), calendar of events, patient resources.

• Asthma Today
• Breathing in America
• Fact Sheets: A-Z
• Fact Sheets: Topic Specific
• Patient Videos
• Other Patient Resources

Lung Disease Week

Public advisory roundtable.

• PAR Publications
• PAR at the ATS Conference

Assemblies & Sections

• Abstract Scholarships
• ATS Mentoring Programs
• ATS Official Documents
• ATS Interest Groups
• Genetics and Genomics
• Medical Education
• Terrorism and Inhalation Disasters
• Allergy, Immunology & Inflammation
• Behavioral Science and Health Services Research
• Clinical Problems
• Environmental, Occupational & Population Health
• Pulmonary Circulation
• Pulmonary Infections and Tuberculosis
• Pulmonary Rehabilitation
• Respiratory Cell & Molecular Biology
• Respiratory Structure & Function
• Sleep & Respiratory Neurobiology
• Thoracic Oncology
• Joint ATS/CHEST Clinical Practice Committee
• Clinicians Advisory
• Council of Chapter Representatives
• Documents Development and Implementation
• Drug/Device Discovery and Development
• Environmental Health Policy
• Ethics and Conflict of Interest
• Health Equity and Diversity Committee
• Health Policy
• International Conference Committee
• International Health
• Members In Transition and Training
• View more...
• Membership Benefits
• Categories & Fees
• Special Membership Programs
• Renew Your Membership
• Update Your Profile
• ATS DocMatter Community
• Respiratory Medicine Book Series
• Elizabeth A. Rich, MD Award
• Member Directory
• ATS Career Center
• Welcome Trainees
• ATS Wellness
• Thoracic Society Chapters
• Chapter Publications
• CME Sponsorship

Corporate Membership

• Assemblies and Sections

Webinar Date:  March 7, 2023

This webinar is focused on providing our perspective on the importance of macro cognition and team cognition in the decision-making process in healthcare settings, most notably the intensive care unit (ICU). The webinar includes live presentations by experts in the field followed by an interactive session from attendees. This webinar features renowned experts: Abdullah Alismail, PhD, RRT, FCCP, FAARC Associate Professor of Cardiopulmonary Sciences & Medicine Department of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, School of Allied Health Professions, Loma Linda University Health, Loma Linda, CA Lauren Blackwell, MD Assistant Professor of Medicine Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY Sugeet K. Jagpal, MD Assistant Professor Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ May Lee, MD, ATSF, FCCP, FACP Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine Director, Pulmonary and Critical Care Fellowship Program Keck Medical Center of USC, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Los Angeles, CA Erica Lin, MD Assistant Professor Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA

Jared Chiarchiaro, MD MS Associate Professor of Medicine Clinical Chief, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, & Critical Care Medicine Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR

Nayla Ahmed, M.B.B.S Pulmonary & Critical Care medicine fellow at Mayo Clinic We invite your participation in this session and look forward to an insightful discussion. If you have questions about this session or have suggestions for future sessions, please contact: Avraham Cooper ATS Section on Medical Education [email protected]  

The American Thoracic Society improves global health by advancing research, patient care, and public health in pulmonary disease, critical illness, and sleep disorders. Founded in 1905 to combat TB, the ATS has grown to tackle asthma, COPD, lung cancer, sepsis, acute respiratory distress, and sleep apnea, among other diseases.

AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY 25 Broadway New York, NY 10004 United States of America Phone: +1 (212) 315-8600 Fax: +1 (212) 315-6498 Email: [email protected]

Privacy Statement | Term of Use | COI Conference Code of Conduct

• Ascension Healthcare Network Disrupted by...
• Performance of iNAV and dNAV Cardiac MRI...
• Enhancing Cancer Care: Audio Mindfulness...
• Ethics Concerns with AI-Based Decision Suppor
• Antibiotic Overuse in Newborns With Suspected

Evaluating Remote Patient Monitoring for...

Understanding Respiratory Drive

Transforming Research to Improve Therapies...

Low vs High Blood Pressure Targets in Critica

Strategies to improve critical thinking in critical care.

• Thu, 4 May 2017

• Making the thinking process explicit. This can be achieved by helping learners understand two primary cognitive processes - Type 1 which is an intuitive pattern-recognising process and Type 2 which is an analytic process.
• Discussing cognitive biases which could include premature closure and minimising biases by expressing uncertainty and keeping differentials broad.
• Modeling and teaching inductive reasoning. This can be done by utilising concept and mechanism maps and teaching learners how this differs from hypothetico-deductive reasoning.
• Stimulating critical thinking by asking How or Why questions which can help trainees uncover their thought processes.
• Assessing and providing feedback on the learner's critical thinking.

References:

Latest articles, decision-making in the icu.

• ICU Journal Article

  Decision-making in the ICU is a multifaceted process that involves clinical assessment, collaboration among multidisciplinary teams, ethical considerations, evidence-based practice, communication, and continuous adaptation to evolving clinical scenarios. Balancing the complex factors requires

Dealing With Uncertainty in ICU Decision-Making: A Practical Guide

  When the stakes are high, and the path ahead is uncertain, the decisions made, especially if a patient continues to worsen, can be sources of self-torment and can haunt us for a long time. Our goal is to suggest ways to steer decision-making for intensivists in the face of uncertainty by prop

The Least Bad Decision: Crisis Standards of Care After the Pandemic

COVID-19 was an emergency that lasted for years and left few regions of the world untouched. The pandemic shone a spotlight on both the strengths and weaknesses of our disaster planning. What worked, what did not, and how can we better plan for future emergencies?   The COVID-19 pandemic fo

Related Articles

#ESAGeneva: Frailer Patients at Greater Risk...

Critical Care at the End of Life: A Study...

5-Year Trends of Critical Care Practice and...

Is exercise good for elderly septic patients?

Latest news.

• Advertising
• Submit Article
• Author Guide
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Terms and conditions
• Copyright and permissions
• Editorial Board
• White Papers & Case Studies
• IMAGING Highlights
• ICU Highlights
• EXEC Highlights
• IT Highlights
• CARDIO Highlights
• HealthManagement
• ICU Management
• (E)Hospital
• Imaging Management
• Imaging Management French
• Healthcare IT
• Cardiology Management
• IQ - Interventional Quarter
• List your event
• Past Events
• International Association
• National Association
• Universities - Institutions
• Movers & Shakers
• Guest Posts
• I-I-I DigiFlash

Communities

• Decision Support
• Women's Health
• Enterprise Imaging
• Artificial Intelligence
• Finance Management
• Cybersecurity
• Sustainability
• Digital Transformation

Rue Villain XIV 53-55

B-1050 brussels, belgium, tel: +357 86 870 007, e-mail: [email protected], emea & row office, 166, agias filaxeos, cy-3083, limassol, cyprus, headquarters, kosta ourani, 5, petoussis court, 5th floor, cy-3085 limassol, cyprus.

Critical Thinking in Critical Care: Five Strategies to Improve Teaching and Learning in the Intensive Care Unit

Affiliations.

• 1 1 Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
• 2 2 Shapiro Institute for Education and Research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; and.
• 3 3 Critical Care Medicine Department, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Massachusetts.
• PMID: 28157389
• PMCID: PMC5461985
• DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201612-1009AS

Critical thinking, the capacity to be deliberate about thinking, is increasingly the focus of undergraduate medical education, but is not commonly addressed in graduate medical education. Without critical thinking, physicians, and particularly residents, are prone to cognitive errors, which can lead to diagnostic errors, especially in a high-stakes environment such as the intensive care unit. Although challenging, critical thinking skills can be taught. At this time, there is a paucity of data to support an educational gold standard for teaching critical thinking, but we believe that five strategies, routed in cognitive theory and our personal teaching experiences, provide an effective framework to teach critical thinking in the intensive care unit. The five strategies are: make the thinking process explicit by helping learners understand that the brain uses two cognitive processes: type 1, an intuitive pattern-recognizing process, and type 2, an analytic process; discuss cognitive biases, such as premature closure, and teach residents to minimize biases by expressing uncertainty and keeping differentials broad; model and teach inductive reasoning by utilizing concept and mechanism maps and explicitly teach how this reasoning differs from the more commonly used hypothetico-deductive reasoning; use questions to stimulate critical thinking: "how" or "why" questions can be used to coach trainees and to uncover their thought processes; and assess and provide feedback on learner's critical thinking. We believe these five strategies provide practical approaches for teaching critical thinking in the intensive care unit.

Keywords: cognitive errors; critical care; critical thinking; medical education.

• Clinical Competence*
• Critical Care*
• Education, Medical, Graduate / methods*
• Intensive Care Units
• Quality Improvement

Promoting optimal physical rehabilitation in ICU

• Published: 02 April 2024
• Volume 50 , pages 755–757, ( 2024 )

Cite this article

• Sabrina Eggmann 1 ,
• Karina Tavares Timenetsky 2 &
• Carol Hodgson   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9002-2075 3 , 4 , 5 , 6  

2106 Accesses

75 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Physical rehabilitation in intensive care units (ICUs) is recommended by guidelines to reduce ICU-acquired physical, mental or psychological complications [ 1 ]. This involves early, individualized exercises that promote physical activity. Depending on critically ill patients’ stability and tolerance, the mobilisation level—often characterized with the ICU mobility scale—is thereby gradually increased from in-bed exercises to sitting, transferring and walking [ 2 ]. A recent meta-analysis with 60 trials ( n  = 5352) demonstrated that physical rehabilitation improved physical function and reduced length of stay when compared to standard care [ 3 ]. Yet despite these benefits, physical rehabilitation is poorly implemented in clinical practice potentially due to concerns of undesirable safety events [ 4 ]. We offer practical recommendations on how to promote optimal physical rehabilitation in your ICU across the continuum of care to reduce ICU-acquired complications (Fig.  1 ).

Recommendations to promote optimal physical rehabilitation across the continuum of care

General recommendations

Physical rehabilitation requires a high level of teamwork. Its successful implementation requires continuous interprofessional collaboration and communication, which can be enhanced with interprofessional rounds, standardized protocols and shared mobilisation goals [ 1 , 5 ]. Interprofessional mobility champions are equally imperative to build a mobility culture where knowledge and expertise is shared across ICU professionals who make physical rehabilitation a priority. To achieve a mobility culture, quality improvement projects are recommended. These should address unique, unit-specific barriers that hinder physical rehabilitation, for example, heavy sedation or a lack of equipment to aid physical rehabilitation [ 1 , 5 ]. Commonly used mobility-aids include custom-made frames to walk ventilated patients or backrests that support sitting balance on the edge of bed. Tilt tables, cycling or robotics devices can expand treatment options, increase patient mobility and activity, and reduce staff injuries [ 6 ].

Recommendations at ICU admission

Physical rehabilitation should not be delayed in patients at risk of ICU-acquired complications [ 1 ]. Upon ICU admission, all patients should be screened daily for their readiness to ensure an appropriate start to rehabilitation. To this end, a standardized approach is recommended, for example through the removal of default bedrest orders or with an automatic referral to physiotherapy [ 5 ]. Readiness for physical rehabilitation is then evaluated with established safety criteria that consider—low, moderate or high—risk for respiratory, hemodynamic, neurological, and other factors [ 7 ]. Physical rehabilitation is generally safe [ 8 ]. However, two recent randomized controlled trials [ 4 , 9 ] reported an increase of adverse events. Notably, the reported events mostly consisted of temporary cardiorespiratory changes that occurred infrequently (< 1% of 696 sessions) [ 9 ] and rarely led to patient harm (0.1% of all patients) [ 4 ]. In a recent meta-analysis comparing physical rehabilitation to usual care, there was no effect on the rate of adverse events [3% (693 events in 23,395 sessions); relative risk (RR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69–1.74] nor an effect on mortality [RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87–1.12] [ 8 ]. In contrast, immobility has long been known to cause harm [ 10 ]. Clinicians are, therefore, advised to carefully balance risks and benefits of both immobility and mobilisation for clinical decision-making.

The subset of patients with the highest likelihood to benefit from physical rehabilitation seem to be stable patients with a prolonged ICU stay [ 11 ]. Yet patients with a higher illness severity are more likely to suffer from ICU-acquired complications [ 10 ]. Early evidence indicates that these severely ill and frail patients are still likely to benefit from reaching higher mobility levels at ICU discharge, whereas young trauma or middle-aged patients particularly seem to profit from a timely started intervention (< 72 h) [ 2 ].

Recommendations during the ICU stay

Higher levels of mobilisation require patient participation. Accordingly, physical rehabilitation is more effective when coordinated with sedation breaks [ 12 ]. Again, interprofessional teamwork is key for the successful coordination of sedation breaks with physical rehabilitation and must include physicians, nurses, physical and occupational therapists. Their combined expertise can further be useful on specific rounds for patients with complex rehabilitation requirements to discuss challenges in recovery or to set goals of care.

Patients recognize the importance of physical rehabilitation, but frequently express exhaustion as a major barrier [ 13 ]. Good communication and consistency in care can foster patients’ trust and participation [ 13 ]. Additionally, structured exercise plans that account for personal care, family visits, individual needs and rest might help to reduce exhaustion. The optimal frequency, intensity and duration of physical rehabilitation are not yet known. The current recommendations are a step-wise progression of functional exercises that are provided for at least 5 days per week [ 3 ]. Nevertheless, clinicians must carefully monitor load and rest, to ensure recovery between mobilisation sessions.

Recommendations at ICU discharge

The level of mobilisation (e.g., using the ICU mobility scale) as well as outcomes of physical function should be routinely documented and evaluated to continuously improve mobilisation performance. They are also an essential part of clinical handover, ensuring ongoing physical rehabilitation and thus avoiding delays in recovery. Measures of physical function might further help to predict ICU-acquired complications and the need for continuous rehabilitation after ICU discharge [ 14 ].

Recommendations for follow-up

The impact of critical illness does not end at ICU discharge. Clear documentation, communication and guidance for transitions of care onto the wards and beyond can ease patients’ recovery by ensuring goals of care are met with ongoing rehabilitation. After hospitalisation, follow-up clinics help to recognize and address ICU-acquired complications, and may benefit ICU clinicians. Feedback from patients can improve staff morale and allows clinicians to improve care [ 15 ]. Awareness of ICU-acquired complications can emphasize the necessity of early interventions such as physical rehabilitation.

Take-home message

Physical rehabilitation reduces ICU-acquired complications, improves functional independence and shortens length of ICU and hospital stay [ 3 , 9 , 12 ], yet in clinical practice, physical rehabilitation remains underused. ICU clinicians should focus beyond survival alone and embrace a culture of improving recovery with optimal physical rehabilitation. Promoting physical rehabilitation includes timely identification of suitable candidates with established safety standards, coordination of evidence-based interventions across professions with targeted sedation breaks, regular assessment of mobilisation performance and functional outcomes at ICU discharge. Finally, patients’ experiences should be followed up and feedbacked into clinical practice to continuously improve ICU care.

Lang JK, Paykel MS, Haines KJ, Hodgson CL (2020) Clinical practice guidelines for early mobilization in the ICU: a systematic review. Crit Care Med 48(11):e1121–e1128

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Fuest KE, Ulm B, Daum N, Lindholz M, Lorenz M, Blobner K, Langer N, Hodgson C, Herridge M, Blobner M, Schaller SJ (2023) Clustering of critically ill patients using an individualized learning approach enables dose optimization of mobilization in the ICU. Crit Care 27(1):1

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Wang YT, Lang JK, Haines KJ, Skinner EH, Haines TP (2022) Physical rehabilitation in the ICU: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med 50(3):375–388

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hodgson CL, Bailey M, Bellomo R, Brickell K, Broadley T, Buhr H, Gabbe BJ, Gould DW, Harrold M, Higgins AM, Hurford S, Iwashyna TJ, Serpa Neto A, Nichol AD, Presneill JJ, Schaller SJ, Sivasuthan J, Tipping CJ, Webb S, Young PJ (2022) Early active mobilization during mechanical ventilation in the ICU. N Engl J Med 387(19):1747–1758

Dubb R, Nydahl P, Hermes C, Schwabbauer N, Toonstra A, Parker AM, Kaltwasser A, Needham DM (2016) Barriers and strategies for early mobilization of patients in intensive care units. Ann Am Thorac Soc 13(5):724–730

Darragh AR, Campo MA, Frost L, Miller M, Pentico M, Margulis H (2013) Safe-patient-handling equipment in therapy practice: implications for rehabilitation. Am J Occup Ther 67(1):45–53

Hodgson CL, Stiller K, Needham DM, Tipping CJ, Harrold M, Baldwin CE, Bradley S, Berney S, Caruana LR, Elliott D, Green M, Haines K, Higgins AM, Kaukonen KM, Leditschke IA, Nickels MR, Paratz J, Patman S, Skinner EH, Young PJ, Zanni JM, Denehy L, Webb SA (2014) Expert consensus and recommendations on safety criteria for active mobilization of mechanically ventilated critically ill adults. Crit Care 18(6):658

Paton M, Chan S, Serpa Neto A, Tipping CJ, Stratton A, Lane R, Romero L, Broadley T, Hodgson CL (2024) Investigation of variables affecting the safe application of early active mobilisation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Respir Med. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(24)00011-0

Patel BK, Wolfe KS, Patel SB, Dugan KC, Esbrook CL, Pawlik AJ, Stulberg M, Kemple C, Teele M, Zeleny E, Hedeker D, Pohlman AS, Arora VM, Hall JB, Kress JP (2023) Effect of early mobilisation on long-term cognitive impairment in critical illness in the USA: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med 11(6):563–572

Vanhorebeek I, Latronico N, Van den Berghe G (2020) ICU-acquired weakness. Intensive Care Med 46(4):637–653

Waldauf P, Jiroutková K, Krajčová A, Puthucheary Z, Duška F (2020) Effects of rehabilitation interventions on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care Med 48(7):1055–1065

Schweickert WD, Pohlman MC, Pohlman AS, Nigos C, Pawlik AJ, Esbrook CL, Spears L, Miller M, Franczyk M, Deprizio D, Schmidt GA, Bowman A, Barr R, McCallister KE, Hall JB, Kress JP (2009) Early physical and occupational therapy in mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 373(9678):1874–1882

van Willigen Z, Ostler C, Thackray D, Cusack R (2020) Patient and family experience of physical rehabilitation on the intensive care unit: a qualitative exploration. Physiotherapy 109:102–110

Milton A, Schandl A, Soliman I, Joelsson-Alm E, van den Boogaard M, Wallin E, Brorsson C, Östberg U, Latocha K, Savilampi J, Paskins S, Bottai M, Sackey P (2020) ICU discharge screening for prediction of new-onset physical disability—a multinational cohort study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 64(6):789–797

Haines KJ, Sevin CM, Hibbert E, Boehm LM, Aparanji K, Bakhru RN, Bastin AJ et al (2019) Key mechanisms by which post-ICU activities can improve in-ICU care: results of the international THRIVE collaboratives. Intensive Care Med 45(7):939–947

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Physiotherapy, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland

Sabrina Eggmann

Department of Critical Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil

Karina Tavares Timenetsky

Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

Carol Hodgson

Department of Physiotherapy, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia

Department of Critical Care, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Critical Care Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carol Hodgson .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Eggmann, S., Timenetsky, K.T. & Hodgson, C. Promoting optimal physical rehabilitation in ICU. Intensive Care Med 50 , 755–757 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-024-07384-w

Download citation

Received : 01 February 2024

Accepted : 03 March 2024

Published : 02 April 2024

Issue Date : May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-024-07384-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Advertisement

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Jump to navigation

Bookmark/Search this post

Mayo Clinic School of Continuous Professional Development

You are here, foundations of critical care nursing online cne course: connecting patient diagnosis to medication therapy.

• Accreditation

Caring for the critical care patient includes understanding common medication therapies for complex diagnosis.  This course will review common medications and nursing considerations for administration.  Concept review and case scenarios include patients with heart failure, acute coronary syndrome and frequently seen therapies including anticoagulation.

Course Director  Denise Rismeyer, DNP, MSN, RN, NPD-BC  Director of Continuing Nursing Education  Mayo Clinic 

Target Audience

This CNE course is designed for RNs, LPNs, and healthcare professionals providing care for progressive and critical care patients.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this activity, participants should be able to:

• Identify common drug classes of medications administered in the inpatient setting
• Describe side effects of common medications
• Discuss nursing considerations related to medication administration for complex patient diagnoses
• Apply knowledge of medications to patient scenarios that may be encountered in the critical care setting

Attendance at any Mayo Clinic course does not indicate or guarantee competence or proficiency in the skills, knowledge or performance of any care or procedure(s) which may be discussed or taught in this course.

• 1.50 Attendance

This course will be presented via a self-guided online interactive module.

Faculty Tiffany Schoenfelder, MSN, RN Nursing Education Specialist – Interventional Cardiovascular Instructor in Nursing – Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science Nursing Professional Development Division Department of Nursing Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN

Course Director Denise Rismeyer, MSN, RN, NPD-BC Director Continuing Nursing Education Program Assistant Professor of Nursing, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science Department of Nursing Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN

Credit Statements ANCC Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science designates this enduring activity for a maximum of 1.50 ANCC contact hours. 

Other Healthcare Professionals A record of attendance will be provided to all registrants for requesting credits in accordance with state nursing boards, specialty societies or other professional associations.

Available Credit

Commitment to Equity, Diversity and Inclusion   

Mayo Clinic School of Continuous Professional Development (MCSCPD) strives to foster a learning environment in which individual differences are valued, allowing all to achieve their fullest potential. 

Cancellation and Refund Policy

Request for cancellations must be submitted in writing to [email protected]. If the cancellation is made prior to the start of the activity, a refund less an administration fee of $25 will be issued. If the cancellation is made after the start of the activity, no refund will be issued. All refunds will be made using the same method as the original payment. 

Any use of this site constitutes your agreement to the Terms and Conditions of Online Registration.  

• Perspective
• Open access
• Published: 09 May 2024

Past, present, and future of sustainable intensive care: narrative review and a large hospital system experience

• Faisal N. Masud 1 ,
• Farzan Sasangohar 1 ,
• Iqbal Ratnani 1 ,
• Sahar Fatima 1 ,
• Marco Antonio Hernandez 1 ,
• Teal Riley 1 ,
• Jason Fischer 2 ,
• Atiya Dhala 3 ,
• Megan E. Gooch 1 ,
• Konya Keeling-Johnson 1 ,
• Jukrin Moon 4 &
• Jean-Louis Vincent 5  

Critical Care volume  28 , Article number:  154 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Healthcare systems are large contributors to global emissions, and intensive care units (ICUs) are a complex and resource-intensive component of these systems. Recent global movements in sustainability initiatives, led mostly by Europe and Oceania, have tried to mitigate ICUs’ notable environmental impact with varying success. However, there exists a significant gap in the U.S. knowledge and published literature related to sustainability in the ICU. After a narrative review of the literature and related industry standards, we share our experience with a Green ICU initiative at a large hospital system in Texas. Our process has led to a 3-step pathway to inform similar initiatives for sustainable (green) critical care. This pathway involves (1) establishing a baseline by quantifying the status quo carbon footprint of the affected ICU as well as the cumulative footprint of all the ICUs in the healthcare system; (2) forming alliances and partnerships to target each major source of these pollutants and implement specific intervention programs that reduce the ICU-related greenhouse gas emissions and solid waste; and (3) finally to implement a systemwide Green ICU which requires the creation of multiple parallel pathways that marshal the resources at the grass-roots level to engage the ICU staff and institutionalize a mindset that recognizes and respects the impact of ICU functions on our environment. It is expected that such a systems-based multi-stakeholder approach would pave the way for improved sustainability in critical care.

Graphical abstract

Introduction

Climate change is one of the major grand challenges humanity faces in the twenty-first century. The burning of fossil fuels is the largest contributor to climate change, responsible for over 75% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [ 1 ]. Among many industries that contribute to GHG emissions, the complexity and growth of global healthcare systems have led to an exponential impact from an environmental standpoint. Healthcare’s carbon emissions and footprints are estimated to be as high as 5% globally, with the United States taking the plurality (one-quarter) of this share [ 2 , 3 ]. Nations with overall high footprints attribute a substantial percentage coming from healthcare (e.g., an Australian assessment found 7% of total carbon was attributable to healthcare industry [ 4 ]); even when the overall industry-specific footprint is lower (as in China), proportions are concentrated around medical supply chain [ 5 ]. The movement to plastic and disposable products has also been a key facilitator to a rapid expansion of care, albeit at the significant cost to the environment [ 6 ]. Other healthcare-related environmental factors include carbon emissions in procurement wastes [ 7 ], direct energy consumptions of equipment [ 8 ], and travel options for patients [ 9 ].

Huffling and Schenk [ 10 ] described a vicious cycle between healthcare and climate change: the healthcare sector’s negative impact on environmental harm contributes to illness or poor health, which then further contributes to more healthcare needs and subsequent environmental harm. GHGs advance climate change and negatively impact air quality, in turn negatively impacting health outcomes. As we continue to experience more frequent extremes including record heatwaves, our clinicians will continue to see its impact on respiratory, renal, and cardiovascular disease. Observational evidence suggests that heat plays a major role in deaths attributed to cardiovascular disease each year [ 11 ].

In the United States, the quest for sustainability started with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 which declared sustainability a national policy [ 12 ]. Since the enactment of the policy, there has been great interest among the public and stakeholders. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes industry-specific reports including EPA/310-R-05-002 [ 13 ], which addresses the responsibilities and challenges of the healthcare industry. Such policies, if implemented well, may inform sustainability efforts that will likely produce a wide range of benefits for any organization, including financial (e.g., energy-saving) and operating efficiencies (e.g., waste reduction may result in reduced workload and streamlined processes), while supporting a growing green economy. However, implementing such policies may be challenging. Adding a layer of environmental sustainability considerations and logistics may appear to be a daunting task, especially in complex environments such as intenstive care units (ICUs).

The complexity of ICU operations may result in extensive waste generation compared to acute care units. For instance, a 12-bed intensive care unit in Brooklyn, New York, generated 7.1 kg of solid waste and 138kg carbon dioxide emissions per bed day [ 14 ]. The same hospital reported a 48-bed acute care unit generating 5.5kg of solid waste and 45kg of carbon dioxide emissions per hospital day [ 14 ]. Critical care has therefore been described as a locus of several of the healthcare industry’s “carbon hotspots” [ 15 ]. Despite the importance of sustainability for ICUs, the efforts in the United States have been limited and little has been done to summarize such efforts in this area to inform effective interventions. While the reason for such a paucity of sustainable healthcare initiatives is not well-documented, some (e.g., Richie, 2014 [ 16 ]) attribute this gap in most part to the political climate in the U.S. In this paper, we aim to review the current state of published sustainability efforts globally, specifically highlighting the U.S. critical care context; share our current sustainability efforts at a large, greater metropolitan area hospital system in Texas; and propose a pathway to a green ICU grounded in our exposure to various barriers and successes.

Previous research on sustainability in critical care

Sustainability in critical care has been investigated in terms of various aspects including environmental, structural, and financial.

Environmental approaches

Efforts have focused on quantifying carbon emissions and footprints [ 6 , 9 , 17 , 18 ] to assess the impact of critical care on environment along the life cycle [ 8 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Notably, Sherman et al. [ 17 ] proposed a comprehensive approach to sustainable healthcare emissions research based on a narrative review. This approach enables the top-down or bottom-up assessment of healthcare services as it frames the research studies around multiple levels including global supply chain, national healthcare sectors, healthcare systems, medical facilities (e.g., hospitals and clinics), clinical care pathways and procedures, and lastly individual drugs, medical devices, and basic materials. Yet, according to Huffling and Schenk [ 10 ], environmental sustainability in ICUs can be evaluated beyond carbon emissions, from the perspectives of waste (e.g., pharmaceuticals, medical or non-medical products and equipment), energy (e.g., lights, temperature settings, monitors, pumps, computers, TVs, batteries, and other equipment that seem to line the walls), toxic chemicals (e.g., air, dust, products, and food), and healing environment (e.g., noise, fast-paced tasks, and stress for staff as well as patients and their family members).

Waste in critical care has been of the topic of great interest to researchers and practitioners alike [ 17 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ], with various case studies published showcasing wasteful stocking and disposal practices. For example, Hunfeld et al. [ 21 ] reported that individual units used per ICU patient per day to be high as 108 disposable gloves, 57 compresses, 34 liquid medicine (infusion bags), 24 syringes, 23 tubes and connectors, 16 disposable clothing, 14 cups and containers, 11 tablets and capsules, 9 surgical masks, and 8 bed liners. The investigation of daily and best practices has centered on the actions of managing waste (without compromising safe and quality care) such as “reduce, reuse, recycle, and rethink” [ 15 , 18 , 19 ]. Those actions have been discussed alongside the incorporation of Lean Six Sigma—which emphasizes, among other process improvement techniques, continuous improvement in waste elimination [ 26 ]—and other quality management initiatives into critical care settings [ 25 , 27 ]. A recent systematic review of waste management practices [ 25 ] found various types of interventions used in longitudinal studies including: policy changes, educational programs, operational procedure changes, waste sorting changes, Lean Six Sigma/total quality management, supply changes, and waste disposal changes. Notably, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought additional attention to waste management practices in critical care [ 24 ].

The waste management practices elicited from surveys, interviews, and observations of critical care professionals in Canada and Finland [ 27 , 28 , 29 ] have shown a common tendency to discuss barriers and facilitators to environmental sustainability based on patient care, organizational, and technological contexts. For instance, Kalogirou et al. [ 29 ] found that patient care and organizational contexts may physically and culturally influence the capabilities of professionals to promote and engage with responsible practices. Nurses participating in semi-structured interviews viewed environmentally sustainable practices to be at odds with both patient care priorities (e.g., patient care workload did not leave bandwidth to consider the environment) and with the organization’s priorities, support, and culture for strategic and operational management (e.g., when their organization puts budget as the top priority). On the other hand, Kallio et al. [ 28 ] and Yu and Baharmand [ 27 ] emphasized the utilization of functional facilities for waste sorting, training, and visible internal communications and reporting related to environmental sustainability.

Structural and financial approaches

Structural and financial aspects of sustainability have also been investigated in critical care settings. Structurally, Halpern et al. [ 30 ] elaborated the evolution of ICU designs in the United States over four decades and highlighted that the evolution was guided by the shift from paper-based medical records to electronic health records. The technical shift has naturally required the support of advanced computers and displays, as well as other standalone informatics platforms such as physiological monitors, mechanical ventilators, infusion pumps, and beds. Financially, critical care has been characterized as expensive and wasteful; accordingly, sustainability efforts in critical care settings have been emphasized to decrease both healthcare costs and environmental hazards. For instance, Van Demark et al. [ 31 ] described their institutional efforts toward environmental sustainability in critical care with a project to reduce the amount of waste generated by hand surgery and showed decrease in both surgical costs and surgical waste while maintaining patient safety and satisfaction.

Global trends in critical care sustainability

The World Health Organization (WHO) has emphasized the importance of sustainable healthcare practices globally, encouraging member states to develop and implement strategies that address environmental concerns. Accordingly, healthcare systems around the world have strived to integrate sustainability into ICU operations. Indeed, the intersection of sustainability and critical care (including surgical, medical, pediatric, and cardiac intensive care, burn care, and neonatal intensive care [ 13 ]) is well-studied with Europe [ 21 , 28 ], the United Kingdom [ 8 , 9 , 32 ], Canada [ 22 , 27 , 29 ], and Australia and New Zealand [ 7 , 33 ] at the forefront of such movement, including educational and advocacy materials [ 15 , 19 , 23 , 34 , 35 ]. European countries have made strides in adopting renewable energy sources and implementing energy-efficient technologies within healthcare facilities. In 2008, The European Union launched the Green Public Procurement (GPP), which is a process that guides sustainable purchasing decisions, including those related to ICU equipment and supplies [ 36 ]. Australia has led impactful initiatives such as the National Health Sustainability and Climate Unit [ 37 ] and National Health and Climate Strategy [ 38 ] which reflect a commitment to sustainability in healthcare, promoting energy efficiency, and responsible resource consumption in ICUs and other medical settings. Such initiatives have shown positive impacts on waste reduction. For example, an Australian staff-driven initiative reduced waste and increased recycling by replacing polystyrene beverage cups with recyclable cups and placing recycling stations in the ICU [ 39 ]. Recent evidence suggests that there is a dedicated clinician or team for Green initiatives in 65% of New Zealand ICUs and 40% of Australian ICUs as of the 2020–2021 financial year [ 40 ]. The Australian-based report ANZICS: A Beginners Guide to Sustainability in the ICU [ 33 ] and the resulting sustainability toolkit have been widely cited; however, this report and other prior work has generally not been widely translated into clinical impact, especially in the United States.

Critical care sustainability in the United States

Broadly stated, there exists a significant gap in U.S. knowledge and published literature related to sustainability in the ICU [ 6 , 10 , 17 , 20 , 24 , 25 , 30 , 31 ]. In addition, despite occasional features in society meetings, U.S. critical care societies have not released any position statements on the impact of sustainability in critical care. Indeed, sustainable ICU initiatives are in their infancy in the United States. In June 1998, the Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E) was launched as a collaboration between the EPA and the American Hospital Association. H2E is currently a leading provider of tools and resources to help hospitals turn their operations green from front end materials purchased to back end waste management [ 41 ]. The group’s goals included total mercury waste reduction by 2005, overall hospital waste reduction of 33% by 2005 and 50% by 2010, and identifying additional substances to minimize/eliminate to prevent further pollution [ 42 ]. A follow up report was published by the EPA in May 2006 regarding the progress of these goals. It was noted that 75% of H2E partners had completely eliminated mercury-containing devices and 90% of hospitals had reduced mercury-containing devices [ 43 ]. However, at the time of writing, no progress has been made on the waste and pollution reduction initiatives.

In 2009, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) created the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) reference guides and rating systems for building design, construction, and existing operations (as amended and expanded to include healthcare) [ 44 , 45 , 46 ]. This guide is a toolkit and rating system for sustainable design and operations in healthcare facilities, including critical care areas. It contains recommendations such as the implementation of energy-efficient technologies, such as LED lighting and high-efficiency HVAC systems, contributing to reduced energy consumption and operational costs [ 46 ]. Complementing the LEED for Healthcare rating system as a third-party form of certification, the Green Guide for Health Care ™ (GGHC) is a voluntary self-certifying tool and joint project of Health Care Without Harm and the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems; GGHC represents a culmination of several years of close collaboration with and guidance from the USGBC [ 47 , 48 ].

LEED for Healthcare was written primarily for inpatient and outpatient care facilities and licensed long-term care facilities. It can also be used for medical offices, assisted living facilities, and medical education and research centers. LEED for Healthcare addresses design and construction activities for both new buildings and major renovations of existing buildings. For a major renovation of an existing building, LEED for Healthcare is the appropriate rating system. If the project focuses more on operations and maintenance activities LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations and Maintenance is more appropriate [ 45 , 46 ].

Several awards and distinctions have been established to recognize hospital systems for their efforts in sustainability in the healthcare realm. Practice Greenhealth is an organization that focuses on sustainability solutions for healthcare systems. In 2023, they named 25 hospitals to receive the Environmental Excellence Award for hospitals leading in healthcare sustainability performance [ 49 ]. The Greenhealth Emerald Award is an honor given to the top 20% of Partner for Change applicants and recognizes hospitals that have excellent sustainability programs and superior scores in multiple sustainability categories [ 50 ]. Additionally, Becker’s Healthcare has published a list several years running of the “Greenest Hospitals in America,” selected based on nominations and editorial research [ 51 ]. These honors provide a benchmark for hospital and healthcare systems to strive for when creating their sustainability programs.

Our sustainability initiative

Houston Methodist (HM) is establishing a firm commitment to creating an environmentally sustainable healthcare institution. HM is a health system comprising eight hospitals throughout the Greater Houston metropolitan area (a 13-county region spanning over 10,000 square miles with a demographically diverse epicenter [ 52 ]) including Houston Methodist Hospital, the flagship academic hospital in the Texas Medical Center, and six community hospitals, as well as one long-term acute care hospital and a seventh community hospital under construction (as of writing).

Unit- and department-specific sustainability efforts depend on broader organizational support and prioritization [ 29 ]. Earlier this year, HM established an Office of Sustainability to oversee and direct the responsible use of resources to conserve the environment and to support system-wide efforts that balance economic viability, social equity, and environmental protection. HM has already rolled out important environmental sustainability initiatives. For example, the system is currently in the design phase for installing solar panels on some of its main buildings in the Texas Medical Center. This project, in partnership with Houston Methodist's Energy and Facilities workgroup, will be the first step toward renewable energy consumption for the hospital. HM has also launched food composting initiatives at its community hospital locations in Sugar Land, The Woodlands, and Willowbrook—with plans for additional campuses to follow. According to the Office of Sustainability, the hospital system has already diverted nearly 100,000 lbs. of food waste from landfills. HM also focuses on preventing waste by recycling or reusing items, from creating a workflow that enables reusing items that can be sanitized to sustainably disposing of expired materials. Finally, another notable initiative is incorporating greenspace for patients to enjoy. Houston Methodist Hospital is currently constructing a 26-story hospital tower that will feature the Centennial Rooftop Garden on the 14th floor.

Several ICU-based projects are in various stages of implementation throughout our hospital system. Most of these initiatives have a low barrier to entry with minimal need for additional personnel or equipment and therefore negligible cost implications. For instance, multiple ICU units within our health system are examining strategies to reduce the amount of unused supply waste, an identified priority considering just one of the ICUs in our health system was found to use 1,464,262 medical supplies in a 6-month period. Some interventions include staff education, changing the supplies in premade procedure kits, using a procedure cart to store supplies, and creating an airway box for intubation supplies. Staff education includes providing awareness of the issue of bringing a surplus of supplies into a patient’s room as well as inappropriately opening the code cart for a supply that is available in another area within the ICU. In addition to reducing excess supplies, teams are attempting to reduce the amount of unnecessary oxygen used in the ICU.

To meet escalating critical care needs, HM also launched a systemwide virtual ICU (vICU) program [ 53 , 54 ], with potential low-carbon implications. This state-of the-art facility leverages the digital transformation of in-hospital care to incorporate remote monitoring and interactive video conferencing. The vICUs’ “consultant bridge” application allows virtual specialist patient consultations, virtual family visits, tele-rounding, and reduction in staff commuting—innovations that reduce travel-associated carbon without compromising the quality and safety of patient care [ 55 ]. These contributions to reducing the carbon footprint are expected to be significant considering that they target critical care’s specific “carbon hotspots” in the healthcare sector [ 15 ], and that similarly significant carbon footprint reductions have been observed for telemedicine programs in broader healthcare delivery contexts in both the U.S. and internationally [ 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 ]. In our tele-critical care experience, and in line with other telemedicine reviews [ 60 , 61 ], telemedicine results in the reduction of interhospital transfers, enabling remote patient evaluations that decreases unnecessary patient transports to tertiary care centers, resulting in potentially singificant cut in the carbon footprint associated with such long-distance travel. It should be noted, however, that studies do not consistently consider additional factors beyond travel in the the emission calculations [ 56 ], e.g., energy and equipment requirements for virtual hubs may require further study.

While the initial programs may seem simplistic in nature, we anticipate barriers to arise as the initiatives expand. These barriers include buy-in from the stakeholders involved in the interventions, resistance to change, and longevity of programs given the nature of human behavior to revert to old habits. In addition, as inititives become more resource-intensive (such as the installation of solar panels), we anticipate even more resistance and significant financial and administrative barriers. Finally, collecting pre- and post-intervention data may impose new workflows, added to already high workloads, and require additional resources. These anticipated barriers underscore the need for continuous stakeholder engagement to inform developments.

A proposed pathway for sustainable ICUs

Grounded in our experience with HM Green ICU efforts, we propose a 3-step pathway to inform similar initiatives for sustainable (green) critical care. The first step in creating an environmentally sustainable ICU is to establish a baseline by quantifying the status quo carbon footprint of the affected ICU as well as the cumulative footprint of all the ICUs in the healthcare system—a step that will require collaboration and partnership with different departments and stakeholders across the system; sustainability effort is a team commitment where each stakeholder, including the clinician leaders and not just administrators and operational leadership, needs to be aware and involved. ICUs and acute care facilities contribute significantly to a hospital’s overall GHG emissions and its solid waste generation. The second step is to form alliances and partnerships to target each major source of these pollutants and implement specific intervention programs that reduce the ICU-related GHG emissions and solid waste. In the third step, successful implementation of a systemwide Green ICU will require the creation of multiple parallel pathways that marshal the resources at the grass-roots level to engage the ICU staff and institutionalize a mindset that recognizes and respects the impact of ICU functions on our environment. These steps are detailed below.

Step 1: Conduct life cycle assessment of ICU products and processes

To establish a baseline for ICU carbon footprint, environmental experts should be engaged to carry a comprehensive audit of the ICU, quantifying the financial and nonfinancial cost of all the inputs and outputs of ICU operations. For example, sustainability teams or offices may partner with local universities that have an established environmental sustainability program to carry out such an audit. Table 1 summarizes some of the proposed audit components.

This audit should provide GHG emissions and solid waste generation per patient, ICU bed, and square footage of the physical space. Another component that may be included is the impact of transportation of ICU staff and patients from home or other medical facilities to the ICU. Medical transport, such as “life flight” services may have significant impact on the environment worth quantifying in future studies. In addition to establishing the status quo of the ICU carbon footprint, the audit teams should provide guidelines about what level of reduction in the carbon footprint would be pragmatic and achievable over a clearly defined period.

When looking to determine emissions and utilize emissions factors, many companies offer software suites that healthcare systems may find costly. While we hope to see lower cost/no cost access to user friendly emissions quantification systems, other resources are available for less resourced settings. When looking to quantify emissions, emissions factors are available through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [ 62 ] and Greenhouse Gas Protocol website of the World Resources Institute and World Business Council for Sustainable Development [ 63 ]. Additionally, Practice Greenhealth and Health Care Without Harm provide resources or direction to resources, including the GGHC as discussed above.

Step 2: Develop green ICU interventions through strategic partnerships

Most health systems and hospitals have formed an office or executive role for sustainability, or minimally may have executives willing to champion sustainability efforts. Partnerships with such offices will allow collaboration with many stakeholders and decision makers outside of the ICU walls to create intervention “bundles” inside and outside the ICU to reduce the carbon footprint by a defined target amount over a stated period. Table 2 summarizes several areas that may be addressed by the experts from outside the ICU such as facilities management and IT.

Step 3: Create green ICU teams comprised of ICU staff— a grass-roots effort

To create a culture and mindset of “green ICU” with the overarching goal of mitigating the ICU-generated pollutants, several Green Teams should be formed, each tasked with implementing a “bundle” of environmental interventions. The Green Teams should include representation by all the functional roles of the facility, including doctors, nurses, technicians, administrators, and custodial staff.

Green Teams serve as the local champions for sustainability and can take the lead in creating the culture for “green” thinking. Guidelines focusing on 3Rs (“Reduce / Recycle / Rethink”) along with such strategies as “Less is More” should be used as educational tools to increase awareness of the impact of resource usage in the ICU. The guidelines, however, should give priority to the demands of patient care. No environmental sustainability directive should compromise the heath and safety of patients or override the judgement of physicians and family members. Table 3 summarizes some of the areas that may be addressed by the 3R team structure.

Recycle team

Certain products can significantly reduce pollution from medical waste. The goal for recycling is reduction of landfill waste and reduction of costs for facilities that purchase the recycled items. Difficulty in sorting the plastic waste and risk of transmitting potential infections limit the practice of recycling medical supplies. Placement of recycling containers for adequate sorting of products is essential. These items can be sent to a third-party facility where items are cleaned, sterilized, and sold back to hospitals for discounted rates [ 14 , 64 , 65 ].

Reduce team

One of the main responsibilities of the reduce team is to identify opportunities for conservation. The complexity of critical care requires large quantities of medical supplies needed for patient care. Infection control precautions demand single use packaging which creates high frequency of plastics waste. Nursing staff often anticipate the use of supplies and pre-stock the room, which results in items that go unused and unopened. This practice creates a surplus of medical supply waste, specifically in the isolation rooms. It is important to raise awareness over infection control policy regarding restrictions of medical supplies taken into isolation rooms. Understanding that unopened supplies will be discarded may trigger staff to help conserve medical supplies. Another option to raise awareness about conservation practices could be to make a price list of supplies. Cognizance over the monetary cost of supply waste may trigger staff to conserve.

Rethink team

Improving awareness by providing education about the recycle and reduce efforts may play a major role in increasing readiness for change to accommodate new policies and processes related to sustainability. For example, education on the composition of recyclable items will be an important part of the green initiative. Plastic recycling can be categorized by ease of recycling type. Education over categories of plastic may help staff understand which supplies are recyclable.

Once the environmental sustainability guidelines have been established for the ICU and the intervention programs have been implemented, periodic progress checks would be needed to measure the effectiveness of the program and possible impact on the ICU footprint. It must be emphasized that the environmental sustainability programs should not compromise quality of patient care and patient safety. For example, switching from single-use to reusable equipment should not increase the risk of infection for the ICU patient. Figure  1 provides an overview of the proposed pathway.

Overview of the porposed pathway for sustainable (Green) ICUs

Conclusions

While the precise accumulated negative environmental effect of thousands of ICUs across the United States remains unknown, such effects represent a significant portion of the healthcare industry’s contribution to the overall carbon footprint. While efforts are in place to improve sustainability in ICUs, there is a general gap in implementation of effective interventions globally and especially in the United States. This paper presents a pathway for such intitiaves grounded in our implementation of a Green ICU in a large health system. A systems approach that involves various stakeholders is necessary to create a plan for effective recycling of medical supplies, reducing unnecessary supplies, and raising awareness of the urgency and value of such initiatives. The proposed pathway has minimal requirements for additional resources and is expected to generalize to a wide range of health systems with varying levels of resources.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Green Guide for Health Care

Greenhouse gas

Green Public Procurement

Hospitals for a Healthy Environment

Houston Methodist (a Greater Houston area hospital system)

Intensive care unit

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

United States Green Building Council

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Causes of climate change. 2021 [cited 2024 Feb 17]. https://www.epa.gov/climatechange-science/causes-climate-change . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Lenzen M, Malik A, Li M, Fry J, Weisz H, Pichler P-P, et al. The environmental footprint of health care: a global assessment. Lancet Planet Health. 2020;4:e271–9.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Eckelman MJ, Huang K, Lagasse R, Senay E, Dubrow R, Sherman JD. Health care pollution and public health damage in the United States: an update. Health Aff. 2020;39:2071–9.

Article   Google Scholar  

Malik A, Lenzen M, McAlister S, McGain F. The carbon footprint of Australian health care. The Lancet Planetary Health. 2018;2:e27-35.

Wu R. The carbon footprint of the Chinese health-care system: an environmentally extended input–output and structural path analysis study. Lancet Planet Health. 2019;3:e413–9.

Alshqaqeeq F, Amin Esmaeili M, Overcash M, Twomey J. Quantifying hospital services by carbon footprint: a systematic literature review of patient care alternatives. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2020;154:104560.

Kubicki MA, McGain F, O’Shea CJ, Bates S. Auditing an intensive care unit recycling program. Crit Care Resusc. 2015;17:135–40.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Pollard AS, Paddle JJ, Taylor TJ, Tillyard A. The carbon footprint of acute care: how energy intensive is critical care? Public Health. 2014;128:771–6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Zander A, Niggebrugge A, Pencheon D, Lyratzopoulos G. Changes in travel-related carbon emissions associated with modernization of services for patients with acute myocardial infarction: a case study. J Public Health (Oxf). 2011;33:272–9.

Huffling K, Schenk E. Environmental sustainability in the intensive care unit: challenges and solutions. Crit Care Nurs Q. 2014;37:235–50.

Khatana SAM, Eberly LA, Nathan AS, Groeneveld PW. Projected change in the burden of excess cardiovascular deaths associated with extreme heat by midcentury (2036–2065) in the contiguous United States. Circulation. 2023;148:1559–69.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Summary of the National Environmental Policy Act. 2013. https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-national-environmental-policy-act . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Office of Compliance, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, United States Environmental Protection Agency. Profile of the healthcare industry Report No.: EPA/310-R-05–002. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. https://archive.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/assistance/sectors/web/pdf/health.pdf . Accessed 17 Feb. 2024.

Prasad PA, Joshi D, Lighter J, Agins J, Allen R, Collins M, et al. Environmental footprint of regular and intensive inpatient care in a large US hospital. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2022;27:38–49.

Baid H, Damm E, Trent L, McGain F. Towards net zero: critical care. BMJ. 2023;381:e069044.

Richie C. Can United States healthcare become environmentally sustainable? Towards green healthcare reform. J Law Med Ethics. 2020;48:643–52.

Sherman JD, Thiel C, MacNeill A, Eckelman MJ, Dubrow R, Hopf H, et al. The green print: advancement of environmental sustainability in healthcare. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2020;161:104882.

See KC. Improving environmental sustainability of intensive care units: a mini-review. World J Crit Care Med. 2023;12:217–25.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

McGain F, Muret J, Lawson C, Sherman JD. Environmental sustainability in anaesthesia and critical care. Br J Anaesth. 2020;125:680–92.

Thiel CL, Eckelman M, Guido R, Huddleston M, Landis AE, Sherman J, et al. Environmental impacts of surgical procedures: life cycle assessment of hysterectomy in the United States. Environ Sci Technol. 2015;49:1779–86.

Hunfeld N, Diehl JC, Timmermann M, van Exter P, Bouwens J, Browne-Wilkinson S, et al. Circular material flow in the intensive care unit-environmental effects and identification of hotspots. Intensive Care Med. 2023;49:65–74.

Morrow J, Hunt S, Rogan V, Cowie K, Kopacz J, Keeler C, et al. Reducing waste in the critical care setting. Nurs Leadersh (Tor Ont). 2013;26 Spec No 2013:17–26.

Wooldridge G, Murthy S. Pediatric critical care and the climate emergency: our responsibilities and a call for change. Front Pediatr. 2020;8:472.

Corbin L, Hoff H, Smith A, Owens C, Weisinger K, Philipsborn R. A 24-hour waste audit of the neuro ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic and opportunities for diversion. J Clim Chang Health. 2022;8:100154.

Slutzman JE, Bockius H, Gordon IO, Greene HC, Hsu S, Huang Y, et al. Waste audits in healthcare: a systematic review and description of best practices. Waste Manag Res. 2023;41:3–17.

Seuring S, Müller M. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod. 2008;16:1699–710.

Yu A, Baharmand I. Environmental sustainability in Canadian critical care: a nationwide survey study on medical waste management. Healthc Q. 2021;23:39–45.

Kallio H, Pietilä A-M, Kangasniemi M. Environmental responsibility in nursing in hospitals: a modified Delphi study of nurses’ views. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29:4045–56.

Kalogirou MR, Dahlke S, Davidson S, Yamamoto S. How the hospital context influences nurses’ environmentally responsible practice: a focused ethnography. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77:3806–19.

Halpern NA, Scruth E, Rausen M, Anderson D. Four decades of intensive care unit design evolution and thoughts for the future. Crit Care Clin. 2023;39:577–602.

Van Demark RE, Smith VJS, Fiegen A. Lean and green hand surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 2018;43:179–81.

Baid H, Richardson J, Scholes J, Hebron C. Sustainability in critical care practice: a grounded theory study. Nurs Crit Care. 2021;26:20–7.

ANZICS (The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society). A beginners guide to sustainability in the ICU. 2022. https://www.anzics.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/A-beginners-guide-to-Sustainability-in-the-ICU.pdf . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Fang L, Hixson R, Shelton C. Sustainability in anaesthesia and critical care: beyond carbon. BJA Educ. 2022;22:456–65.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Barbariol F, Baid H. Introduction to an intensive care recycling program. Intensive Care Med. 2023;49:327–9.

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Public procurement for a better environment {SEC(2008) 2124} {SEC(2008) 2125} {SEC(2008) 2126}. 2008. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52008DC0400 . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. New team and strategy to lead response to health and wellbeing impacts of climate change. Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. 2022. https://www.health.gov.au/ministers/the-hon-ged-kearney-mp/media/new-team-and-strategy-to-lead-response-to-health-and-wellbeing-impacts-of-climate-change . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. National health and climate strategy. Commonwealth of Australia. 2023. https://www.health.gov.au/resources/collections/national-health-and-climate-strategy-resources-collection . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Victoria State Government Department of Health & Human Services. Staff driven sustainability initiatives within an ICU - Dandenong Hospital. Victoria State Government Department of Health & Human Services. 2016. https://www.health.vic.gov.au/publications/staff-driven-sustainability-initiatives-within-an-icu-dandenong-hospital . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Trent L, Law J, Grimaldi D. Create intensive care green teams, there is no time to waste. Intensive Care Med. 2023;49:440–3.

Lee D. The healthcare design decade. HERD. 2007;1:20–1.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Fact Sheet: Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E). Report No.: EPA 742-F-99-016. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/910237TT.PDF?Dockey=910237TT.PDF . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Evaluation of the EPA Hospitals for a Healthy Environment program. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/eval-hosp-healthy-envt-program.pdf . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

U.S. Green Building Council. LEED 2009 for new construction and major renovations rating system. U.S. Green Building Council. 2016. https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-new-construction-v2009-current-version . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

U.S. Green Building Council. LEED 2009 for healthcare. U.S. Green Building Council. 2016. https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-new-construction-v2009-current-version . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

U.S. Green Building Council. LEED v4.1. U.S. Green Building Council. 2024. https://www.usgbc.org/leed/v41#bdc . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Green Guide for Health Care. Health Care Without Harm. 2013. https://noharm-global.org/issues/global/green-guide-health-care . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Green Guide for Health Care(tm) frequently asked questions. 2007. https://noharm.org/sites/default/files/lib/downloads/building/GGHC_FAQ.pdf . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Twenter P. 25 hospitals win environmental sustainability award. Becker’s Hospital Review. 2023. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/rankings-and-ratings/25-hospitals-win-environmental-sustainability-award.html . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Practice Greenhealth. Awards and recognition. 2023. https://practicegreenhealth.org/data-and-awards/awards-and-recognition . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Becker’s Hospital Review staff. 68 of the greenest hospitals in America. Becker’s Hospital Review. 2018. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/lists/68-of-the-greenest-hospitals-in-america-2018.html . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Greater Houston Community Foundation. Population and Diversity. Understanding Houston. 2024. https://www.understandinghouston.org/topic/community-context/population-and-diversity/ . Accessed 16 April 2024.

Dhala A, Sasangohar F, Kash B, Ahmadi N, Masud F. Rapid implementation and innovative applications of a virtual intensive care unit during the COVID-19 pandemic: case study. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22:e20143.

Dhala A, Fusaro MV, Uddin F, Tuazon D, Klahn S, Schwartz R, et al. Integrating a virtual ICU with cardiac and cardiovascular ICUs: managing the needs of a complex and high-acuity specialty ICU cohort. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2023;19:4–16.

Sasangohar F, Dhala A, Zheng F, Ahmadi N, Kash B, Masud F. Use of telecritical care for family visitation to ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic: an interview study and sentiment analysis. BMJ Qual Saf. 2021;30:715–21.

Rodler S, Ramacciotti LS, Maas M, Mokhtar D, Hershenhouse J, De Castro Abreu AL, et al. The impact of telemedicine in reducing the carbon footprint in health care: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of 68 million clinical consultations. Eur Urol Focus. 2023;9:873–87.

Lathan R, Hitchman L, Walshaw J, Ravindhran B, Carradice D, Smith G, et al. Telemedicine for sustainable postoperative follow-up: a prospective pilot study evaluating the hybrid life-cycle assessment approach to carbon footprint analysis. Front Surg. 2024;11:1300625.

Schmitz-Grosz K, Sommer-Meyer C, Berninger P, Weiszflog E, Jungmichel N, Feierabend D, et al. A telemedicine center reduces the comprehensive carbon footprint in primary care: a monocenter, retrospective study. J Prim Care Community Health. 2023;14:21501319231215020.

Cummins M, Shishupal S, Wong B, Wan N, Johnny JD, Mhatre-Owens A, et al. Observational study of travel distance between participants in U.S. telemedicine sessions with estimates of emissions savings. J Med Internet Res. 2024. https://doi.org/10.2196/53437 .

Purohit A, Smith J, Hibble A. Does telemedicine reduce the carbon footprint of healthcare? A systematic review. Future Healthc J. 2021;8:e85-91.

Holmner A, Ebi KL, Lazuardi L, Nilsson M. Carbon footprint of telemedicine solutions–unexplored opportunity for reducing carbon emissions in the health sector. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e105040.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Air Emissions Factors and Quantification. 2016. https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-factors-and-quantification . Accessed 16 April 2024.

World Resources Institute, World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Calculation Tools and Guidance. GHG Protocol. https://ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools-and-guidance . Accessed 16 April 2024.

Joseph B, James J, Kalarikkal N, Thomas S. Recycling of medical plastics. Adv Ind Eng Polym Res. 2021;4:199–208.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Weiss E. Recycling medical equipment to reduce medical waste. Earth911. 2021. https://earth911.com/business-policy/recycle-medical-equipment-reduce-waste/ . Accessed 17 Feb 2024.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Jacob M. Kolman, MA, ISMPP CMPP™, senior scientific writer at the Houston Methodist Academic Institute and senior technologist at Texas A&M University, for his critical review and language editing on this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for Critical Care, Houston Methodist, 6550 Fannin St., Houston, TX, 77030, USA

Faisal N. Masud, Farzan Sasangohar, Iqbal Ratnani, Sahar Fatima, Marco Antonio Hernandez, Teal Riley, Megan E. Gooch & Konya Keeling-Johnson

Office of Sustainability, Houston Methodist, 6550 Fannin St., Houston, TX, 77030, USA

Jason Fischer

Department of Surgery, Houston Methodist, 6550 Fannin St., Houston, TX, 77030, USA

Atiya Dhala

Center for Health Data Science and Analytics, Houston Methodist, 6550 Fannin St., Houston, TX, 77030, USA

Jukrin Moon

Erasme University Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

Jean-Louis Vincent

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

FM, FS, IR, SF, and MH were involved in the conception and design of the work. TR, JF, AD, MG, KK, JV, and JM drafted different sections. FS and SF have drafted the work or substantially revised it. All authors have approved the submitted version and have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Faisal N. Masud .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Masud, F.N., Sasangohar, F., Ratnani, I. et al. Past, present, and future of sustainable intensive care: narrative review and a large hospital system experience. Crit Care 28 , 154 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-04937-9

Download citation

Received : 11 March 2024

Accepted : 29 April 2024

Published : 09 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-04937-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Critical care
• Environmentalism
• Environmental policy

Critical Care

ISSN: 1364-8535

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]