Abstract：
To provide guidelines for reducing the environmental impact of general anaesthesia.
A committee of ten experts from SFAR and SF2H and SFPC learned societies was set up. A policy of declaration of competing interests was applied and observed throughout the guideline-writing process. Likewise, it did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product (drug or medical device). The committee followed the GRADE® method (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based.
We aimed to formulate recommendations according to the GRADE® methodology for three different fields: anaesthesia vapours and gases; intravenous drugs; medical devices and the working environment. Each question was formulated according to the PICO format (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome). The literature review and recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology.
The experts\' work on the synthesis and application of the GRADE® method led to the formulation of 17 recommendations. Since the GRADE® method could not be entirely applied to all of the questions, some of the recommendations were formulated as expert opinions.
Based on strong agreement between experts, we produced 17 recommendations designed to guide reducing the environmental impact of general anaesthesia.
A committee of ten experts from SFAR and SF2H and SFPC learned societies was set up. A policy of declaration of competing interests was applied and observed throughout the guideline-writing process. Likewise, it did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product (drug or medical device). The committee followed the GRADE® method (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based.
We aimed to formulate recommendations according to the GRADE® methodology for three different fields: anaesthesia vapours and gases; intravenous drugs; medical devices and the working environment. Each question was formulated according to the PICO format (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome). The literature review and recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology.
The experts\' work on the synthesis and application of the GRADE® method led to the formulation of 17 recommendations. Since the GRADE® method could not be entirely applied to all of the questions, some of the recommendations were formulated as expert opinions.
Based on strong agreement between experts, we produced 17 recommendations designed to guide reducing the environmental impact of general anaesthesia.
摘要：
目的：为减少全身麻醉对环境的影响提供指导。
方法：成立了一个由来自SFAR、SF2H和SFPC学会的10名专家组成的委员会。在整个准则编写过程中，都适用并遵守了宣布相互竞争利益的政策。同样，它没有从营销健康产品(药物或医疗设备)的公司的任何资金中受益。委员会遵循了GRADE®方法(建议评估的分级，开发和评估）以评估建议所基于的证据的质量。
方法：我们旨在根据GRADE®方法为三个不同领域制定建议：麻醉蒸气和气体；静脉注射药物；医疗器械和工作环境。每个问题都是根据PICO格式(人口，干预,比较器,结果）。文献综述和建议是根据GRADE®方法制定的。
结果：关于GRADE®方法的合成和应用的专家工作导致了17项建议的制定。由于GRADE®方法不能完全适用于所有问题，其中一些建议是作为专家意见提出的。
结论：基于专家之间的强烈共识，我们提出了17项建议,旨在指导减少全身麻醉对环境的影响.
方法：成立了一个由来自SFAR、SF2H和SFPC学会的10名专家组成的委员会。在整个准则编写过程中，都适用并遵守了宣布相互竞争利益的政策。同样，它没有从营销健康产品(药物或医疗设备)的公司的任何资金中受益。委员会遵循了GRADE®方法(建议评估的分级，开发和评估）以评估建议所基于的证据的质量。
方法：我们旨在根据GRADE®方法为三个不同领域制定建议：麻醉蒸气和气体；静脉注射药物；医疗器械和工作环境。每个问题都是根据PICO格式(人口，干预,比较器,结果）。文献综述和建议是根据GRADE®方法制定的。
结果：关于GRADE®方法的合成和应用的专家工作导致了17项建议的制定。由于GRADE®方法不能完全适用于所有问题，其中一些建议是作为专家意见提出的。
结论：基于专家之间的强烈共识，我们提出了17项建议,旨在指导减少全身麻醉对环境的影响.
