Can healthcare go green without compromising safety?

U.S. hospitals generate nearly six million tons of waste each year, and a single patient can be responsible for more than 30 pounds a day. Much of that waste comes from the operating room (OR), which accounts for up to a third of a hospital’s total output and is among the most expensive areas to manage.

A large portion comes from single-use devices, packaging, and transport materials. These practices are often criticized, and not without reason. But in settings like transplantation, much of that waste is directly tied to protecting patients.

I’m often asked, “Why not make devices reusable?” or “What about the environmental impact?” After years in the OR and working alongside transplant teams, I’ve asked those same questions. The answers aren’t black and white, but that doesn’t mean we should stop asking.

Sustainability often gets reduced to packaging claims or material swaps. But the real impact lies in the systems we build around the product. That’s the conversation we need to be having.

Why single-use still matters

Some of the industry’s most criticized practices, like single-use devices, are also the least negotiable. Single-use eliminates the need for sterilization between uses, simplifies prep and cleanup, and reduces the risk of infection.

The FDA permits reprocessing of certain single-use tools, but only under strict conditions. Nowhere is that margin tighter than in organ transplantation. There are no do-overs when you’re handling a human organ. Transplant patients are especially vulnerable to infection due to immunosuppression, and even small lapses in sterility can lead to serious complications.

Device-associated infections, from central lines, catheters, and ventilators, are among the most common and serious complications following transplant. The CDC also notes that while concerns persist about reusing single-use devices, more research is needed to define the risks. Devices that reduce infection risk and prevent complications can lead to fewer readmissions, which means fewer hospital resources used and better sustainability over time.

The systems around the product

Many conversations about sustainability start and stop with the product itself, whether it’s recyclable, biodegradable, or made with “green” materials. But many of the most wasteful decisions happen in how a product moves through the system that supports it. And when that system spans hospitals, suppliers, procurement teams, and legal departments, it’s not built for fast change. Even when the intention is there, funding constraints, liability concerns, and the challenge of making changes across large networks often stand in the way.

While a fragmented system can’t solve the footprint of a single device, medical device companies still have control over how their products are moved and managed, and that’s where meaningful change can start.

Flying devices around the world might be fast, but it adds unnecessary emissions to an already resource-intensive process. And it’s often done not because it’s needed, but because it’s familiar. Shifting to road transport takes more coordination, but it significantly cuts emissions and gives teams more control over when and how products arrive.

What happens after delivery matters just as much. Without a plan for how products are returned, stocked, or moved, operations can shift into reaction mode. That’s when waste shows up through emergency shipments, over-ordering, and unused inventory. In kidney transplant, for example, reusable machine perfusion systems have improved outcomes, but broader use has revealed logistical friction, including turnaround delays and higher discard rates.

Inefficient habits tend to stay hidden until the consequences catch up. For years, private air travel has been the default in time-sensitive cases, but it comes with a steep environmental cost. At my current company, our team found that one chartered jet can emit as much carbon as manufacturing 200 single-use medical devices. With better planning, commercial flights can often meet the same clinical timelines and reduce emissions without compromising care.

Sustainability has to show up in the operational decisions because if the systems around the product are wasteful, it doesn’t matter how recyclable the product is. Recyclability won’t negate the carbon footprint of wasteful shipping, inefficient production, or reactive inventory habits. A product isn’t sustainable if it arrives on a private jet, was rushed through the supply chain, or sits unused on a shelf.

Sustainability starts with better questions

Healthcare won’t eliminate waste entirely. But small changes matter. Reducing reliance on private air travel. Avoiding emergency shipments. Moving production closer to where products are used. None of it sounds radical. But over time, it adds up. And more often than not, it comes down to refusing to accept waste as the cost of doing business.

For healthcare leaders, it’s worth stepping back to examine the systems tied to a product and where a few deliberate improvements could make an impact.

Not every change requires an overhaul. But the right operational shift, at the right point in the process, can reduce waste without ever touching the safety of patient care. And if enough companies commit to that kind of thinking, that’s how you move an industry forward.

Lisa Anderson is president and founder of Paragonix Technologies.

View the full article