Surgeon perspectives on preference cards and environmental stewardship

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundRefinement of surgical preference cards may reduce waste from surgery. This study aimed to characterize surgeon perceptions and practices regarding preference card maintenance, identify barriers to updating preference cards, and explore whether opinions on environmental stewardship relate to preference card maintenance.MethodsThis was a mixed methods survey performed at a single tertiary academic medical center. Surgeons completed questions on accuracy, frequency of updates, and perceived environmental impact of their preference cards. Responses were compared between early career and mid‐to late‐career surgeons using Kruskal–Wallis, chi‐squared, and Fisher's exact tests.ResultsThe response rate was 46.4% (n = 89/192). Among respondents, 46.1% (n = 41/89) rarely or never updated preference cards. Nearly all (98.9%, n = 87/88) said some of their cases had unused items on their cards. Most (87.6%, n = 78/89) made updates via verbal requests. Unfamiliar processes (83.7%, n = 72/86) and effort required (64.0%, n = 55/86) were viewed as barriers to card maintenance. Most agreed that more frequent updates would reduce waste (80.5%, n = 70/87), but respondents did not feel knowledgeable about the environmental impact of items on their cards (62.1%, n = 54/87). Mid‐to late‐career surgeons were less likely to update their cards annually or more often compared to early career surgeons (18.9%, n = 7/37 vs. 57.1%, n = 24/42, p < 0.001). No other responses varied significantly between early career and mid‐to late‐career surgeons.ConclusionsSurgeons acknowledged the utility of preference card maintenance in environmental stewardship, but unfamiliar systems and perceived effort hindered preference card review. Greater attention to preference card maintenance would promote environmentally sustainable practices in surgery.