Positive environmental impact of remote teleconsultation in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic in a highly populated area.

INTRODUCTION

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are a serious environmental issue. The healthcare sector is an important emitter of GHGs. Our aim was to assess the environmental cost of teleconsultations in urology compared to face-to-face consultations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective study of all patients who had a remote teleconsultation over a 2-week period during COVID-19 pandemic. Main outcome was the reduction in COe emissions related to teleconsultation compared to face-to-face consultation and was calculated as: total teleconsultation COe emissions-total face-to-face consultation COe emissions. Secondary outcome measures were the reduction in travel distance and travel time related to teleconsultation.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were included. Face-to-face consultations would have resulted in 6699km (4162 miles) of travel (83.7km (52 miles) per patient). Cars were the usual means of transport. COe avoided due to lack of travel was calculated at 1.1 tonnes. Teleconsultation was responsible for 1.1kg COe while face-to-face consultation emitted 0.5kg of COe. Overall, the total reduction in GHGs with teleconsultation was 1141kg COe, representing a 99% decrease in emissions. Total savings on transport were 974 € and savings on travel time were 112h (1.4h/patient).

CONCLUSIONS

Teleconsultation reduces the environmental impact of face-to-face consultations. The use of teleconsultation in our urology departments resulted in the avoidance of more than 6000km of travel, equivalent to a reduction of 1.1 tonnes of COe. Teleconsultation should be considered for specific indications as the healthcare system attempts to become greener.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE