OP81 Do Sustainable Healthcare Principles Inform Guidance Development? An Exemplary Case Study In Respiratory Care

Abstract

Introduction At the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) in 2021, over 40 countries made commitments to low carbon, sustainable health care. Respiratory care provides a case study to explore how existing evidenced-based guidance can inform progress towards more sustainable care pathways and technologies. Our aim is to identify whether environmental aspects of health technology assessment (HTA) are referenced in guidance and the extent to which the four principles of sustainable health care (prevention, self-care, streamlining, and low carbon technology) are promoted in guidance. Methods Internet searches enabled identification of current national guidance on management of respiratory diseases in English, French or Polish. Guidances were reviewed to identify references to environmental aspects of HTA and recommendations that align with each of the four sustainable healthcare principles. Results Guidance on respiratory care is produced by varied stakeholders globally. Some principles of sustainable health care are frequently reflected in guidance to improve quality of care, but others are missed where environment sustainability is not considered. Reference to HTAs incorporating environmental impacts is lacking. There is limited engagement with the environmental impacts of inhalers in guidance. Guidance created by clinician groups (e.g., Greener Practice) and research networks (e.g., Centre for Sustainable Health Systems) has responded more quickly to the need to address sustainability concerns compared to guidance produced by national public bodies. Conclusions HTA organizations may need to take a broader perspective, incorporating environmental impacts in assessments. This could have an influential role in enabling evidence-informed guidance and development of sustainable care pathways and technologies. Limitations of our study were lack of evaluation of local guidance due to limited capacity, language restrictions, and subjectivity in assessing whether each sustainable healthcare principle was addressed in guidance. There may be limited transferability of our results to other specialties or settings. Further research on the sustainability impacts and relative merits of different health technologies and care pathways is required to inform HTA and guidance.