Search

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: (Figure presented.), SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Background: Computer-based cognitive rehabilitation programs may help adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients with cancer-related cognitive impairment. This pilot study investigated the feasibility of cognitive rehabilitation as a preventive intervention for AYA patients receiving chemotherapy. Explorative objectives included the correlation of cognitive performance with serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). Methods: This pilot prospective study included English-speaking patients 12-25 years of age with a fist diagnosis of cancer requiring chemotherapy. Participants enrolled in the intervention arm participated in a computer-based neurocognitive training program for 20-30 minutes daily for 16 weeks. Outcome measures, including engagement with and completion of computerized neurocognitive testing and serum BDNF levels, were obtained within the first month following diagnosis, ∼16 and 24 weeks from enrollment. Results: Fourteen of 18 eligible patients provided consent, with 7 patients assigned to each the intervention arm and nonintervention arm. Seventy-one percent of the patients in the intervention arm completed at least 80% of the required activities. Compared to baseline, patients in the nonintervention arm demonstrated higher prevalence of impairment in four of the six cognitive domains (processing speed, visual attention, attention/working memory, and executive function) at the end of the study period. There was a nonstatistically significant reduction of serum BDNF levels over time, which was observed in both intervention and nonintervention arms. Conclusion: This pilot study provides some evidence that it is feasible for AYAs with new cancer diagnoses to receive standardized cognitive rehabilitation. Patients receiving cognitive activities experienced less impairment in numerous cognitive domains.