Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;335:1060 (24 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.39402.471863.BE
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Last year Stott and Godlee asked what we as health professionals can do about climate change.1 Traditional medical practice generates considerable carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases through travel. Yet many medical interactions can be delivered by telephone, videoconferencing, or email (telemedicine) as effectively as face to face. The balance between environmental benefits (and costs) of telemedicine is being examined in a new area of research—environmental e-health (R E Scott et al, sixth annual Canadian Society of Telehealth conference, Halifax, Nova Scotia, October 2003).
Three examples show how doctors can reduce their carbon footprint. A telepaediatric service in Queensland, Australia, provides a broad range of specialist services to children living remotely.2 Telemedicine is used to manage 17% of paediatric outpatients with burns. Over six years, 1000 videoconference consultations eliminated about 1.4 million km of patient travel,3 which reduced CO2 emissions by 39 tonnes each year. If the analysis
Anthony C Smith, senior research fellow1, Victor Patterson, consultant neurologist2, Richard E Scott, associate professor3
1 Centre for Online Health, University of Queensland, Qld 4029, Australia, 2 Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast BT12 6BA, 3 Global e-Health Research and Training Programme, Health Innovation and Information Technology Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 4N1
a.smith@pobox.com
Read all Rapid Responses