Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Medical Waste Disposal”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,225 records · Page 68Linked to original sources
PubMed1983

[Waste from hospitals, health resorts and sanatoria].

As part of the waste disposal planning in the administrative districts in Nordrhein-Westfalen, the present expertise intends to determines the requirements to be satisfied by the collection and intermediate storage of hospital waste, and to answer the question from a hygienic point of view as to what sort of waste may be taken to an internal garbage dump and what waste is to be burned. From among the variety of hospital refuse, that material was selected for which, as a result of the direct contact between waste and patient, a certain hygienic risk could not be entirely ruled out. This includes waste from the wards similar to private houshold garbage, medical soft waste (swabs, dressings etc.) medical solid waste (syringes, cannulae etc.). For waste other than this, disposal by way of garbage dumps is considered unproblematic or else such waste is to be disposed off in compliance with legal provisions (infection wards). For organ refuse, the only mode of disposal is by burying or burning. On perusal of the literature it was found that with regard to the hygienic condition of the above-mentioned waste, views differ widely ranging from "unobjectionable" to "infectious". Apart from this, these views are not supported by microbiological data ascertained experimentally. However, a reliable assessment cannot do without such data. Preliminary investigations were carried out to see what waste disposal routes exist in the various hospitals; then in two hospitals the waste volume of each ward was determined on 7 workdays over a total period of approx. two months and the waste was checked for the three sorts of refuse mentioned above. It was found that the refuse averaged 0.54 or 0.56 kgs per bed per day and 5.44 or 5.43 litres per bed per day with a specific weight of 0.10 kg/l. The microbiological analyses included both hospital refuse and "normal" household garbage from three dumps. Within the first group of waste the analyses covered not only waste conglomerates but also individual refuse ingredients (e.g. syringes). The workup comprised 264 waste samples from the hospital area and 21 samples from dumps, which were subjected to quantitative and qualitative microbiological tests. The results showed that hospital refuse very often contains less pathogens than household garbage and that it was even germ-free in some cases; especially individual samples repeatedly proved to be free of bacterial growth.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Bacteria↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Patient practices and beliefs concerning disposal of medications.

BACKGROUND: Clear guidance for how patients should dispose of unused and expired medications is lacking. Medications improperly disposed of can make their way into groundwater, surface water, and even drinking water. Incineration is the best disposal option currently available for waste medications. Although a few pharmacies will facilitate proper disposal of unused and expired medications, the majority will not. METHODS: A total of 301 patients at an outpatient pharmacy completed a survey about medication disposal practices and beliefs. RESULTS: More than half of the patients surveyed reported storing unused and expired medications in their homes, and more than half had flushed them down a toilet. Only 22.9% reported returning medication to a pharmacy for disposal. Less than 20% had ever been given advice about medication disposal by a health care provider. Previous counseling was highly associated with returning medications to a pharmacy (45.8% vs 17.1%, P < .001) and was the variable most associated with returning medications to a provider (28.8% vs 10.0%, P < .001). Previously counseled respondents were significantly more likely to believe that returning medications to a pharmacy (91.5% vs 60.3%, P < .001) or a medical provider (74.6% vs 47.3%, P < .001) was acceptable. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that there is a role for patient education about proper disposal of unused and expired medications.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1989

Waste management.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Disposable Equipment↗
PubMed1992

Waste not. Hospitals reduce, recycle and manage waste.

In the '80s, medical waste became a dirty word. On the heels of popular, and often distorted, fears about the dangers of medical waste, hospitals faced a monumental task: to evaluate their current handling of waste and, in many cases, develop new programs and disposal methods.

Conservation of Natural Resources↗
PubMed1997

Extracted teeth: decontamination, disposal and use.

With the advent of medical waste and OSHA infection control regulations, many practitioners are unsure about the legal, proper handling of extracted teeth. This article outlines the options available for the disposal of extracted teeth and explains the role each regulatory agency plays in the process.

California↗
PubMed1990

Comprehensive waste regulation dumped. A limited demonstration project is all that remains.

When medical wastes started washing up along the Eastern Seaboard and the shores of the Great Lakes in 1988, healthcare providers became subject to close public scrutiny. Not only was the situation deplorable; the solution, they feared, would keep them entangled in red tape for years. Public outcry sent members of Congress scurrying to legislate medical waste regulation. But what many had predicted would be a comprehensive, nationwide regulation that tracked medical waste from cradle to grave turned out to be a demonstration project limited to Puerto Rico and four states in the Northeast. The Medical Waste Tracking Act of 1988 went into effect in June 1989. When it expires in June 1991, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will report to Congress on the program's impact, presumably with an eye toward whether further legislation and continuing regulations are necessary. In the meantime, participating states must establish a system of tracking medical waste from its point of generation to its disposal by either incineration or burial in a landfill. Medical waste generators must separate it from other kinds of waste and place it in special labeled containers. They must also prepare a tracking form that accompanies the cargo and requires sign-off by generator, transporter, and disposal facility operator. The EPA has legal access to medical waste tracking forms and can inspect any site where medical wastes are located. Violators are subject to stiff civil and criminal penalties.

Facility Regulation and Control↗
PubMed1986

Practical aspects of hazardous waste management for hospitals.

The two previous articles in this four-part series introduced the need for hazardous waste management in hospitals, the regulatory background, and insight into determining which hospital waste streams are hazardous or infectious. In this article the author focuses on the management of these waste streams including handling, packaging, storage procedures, and methods of disposal, and discusses those factors which need to be considered when choosing a disposal method.

Materials Management, Hospital↗