Sustainable decontamination
How can sterile services become greener?
Alison Arnold says that sustainable healthcare is no longer a “nice to have” – it’s an essential part of delivering safe, cost-effective and responsible services. In this article, she discusses the way forward.
Sterile Services Departments (SSDs) sit at the heart of infection prevention and patient safety, but they also face growing pressure to cut waste, reduce environmental impact and support NHS Net Zero targets. The question is: how can SSDs go greener without compromising compliance, quality or safety?
A pressing challenge Healthcare’s environmental footprint is significant, and decontamination is one of the most resource-intensive areas. SSDs consume water, energy, chemicals and packaging on a vast scale, and every reprocessed instrument carries both an environmental and financial cost. Pressure is growing for SSDs to address this impact. The NHS has committed to Net Zero, and similar pledges exist worldwide. Yet departments can’t reduce their standards. Every tray must be cleaned, disinfected and sterilised with absolute reliability. Any solution has to preserve compliance while reducing environmental impact. Sustainability and safety aren’t opposing
forces. Smarter products, better processes and improved education can reduce waste and carbon while strengthening patient safety.
Where can improvements be made? There are several areas where meaningful change is possible: Chemical choice: Selecting highly effective, concentrated formulations allows departments to reduce packaging, water and energy use
while still delivering validated decontamination outcomes. The right detergent works across different water qualities, at lower doses, and is gentle on delicate instruments, extending their life and avoiding unnecessary reprocessing. Concentrated formulations also mean fewer deliveries and reduced storage requirements, lowering both carbon footprint and logistical complexity. Packaging: Rigid plastics are a persistent
problem. By moving to pouch systems or recyclable formats, SSDs can dramatically cut plastic waste. Serchem’s shift to eco-friendly pouches for endoscopy flushing solutions, for example, reduces plastic by around three- quarters without affecting performance. Reducing reliance on single-use containers lowers costs, storage needs and environmental impact while maintaining compliance. Central dosing systems: Central dosing
represents one of the most effective innovations for greener sterile services. By moving from per-machine or per-sink dosing to a central chemical store with metered distribution, departments eliminate multiple small containers, improve dosing precision and minimise staff exposure to chemicals. Central dosing reduces plastic waste, improves
50
www.clinicalservicesjournal.com I June 2026
consistency and streamlines workflow. Maintenance and refilling can take place outside sterile zones, reducing disruption and enhancing safety. Remote alarms notify staff when stock is low, preventing downtime or last-minute reprocessing. Process validation: Validated processes
reduce unnecessary reprocessing. Robust monitoring prevents chemical overuse, saves water and energy, and extends instrument lifespan. Continuous analysis supports improvements and helps demonstrate compliance to regulatory bodies. Education and training: Change only succeeds if staff feel confident that greener products and processes won’t compromise safety. Technicians and managers need to understand how to use new formulations, dosing systems and packaging correctly, and why these changes matter. When teams are confident in their practices, they’re more likely to embed them into daily routines. Sharing best practice across departments and Trusts ensures lessons learned in one setting benefit many more. Small changes, big impact: From eco-friendly
pouch packaging to tailored advice on workflow improvements, Serchem supports SSDs in achieving compliance and sustainability. Its
Brigitte -
stock.adobe.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72
