English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background: Given the importance of proper management of Health Care Waste Management (HCWM), comprehensive information on interventions in this field is necessary. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review and meta-analysis of characteristics and results of interventions in the field of HCWM. Methods: The required data were gathered through searching the keywords such as waste management, biomedical waste, hospitals waste, health care waste, infectious waste, medical waste, Waste Disposal Facilities, Garbage, Waste Disposal Facilities, Hazardous Waste Sites in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Google scholar, Cochrane library, Science Direct, web of knowledge, SID and MagIran and hand searching in journals, reference by reference, and search in Gray literatures between 2000 and 2019. CMA software: 2 (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis) was used to perform the meta-analysis. Results: Twenty-seven interventions were evaluated. Most of the studies were conducted after 2010, in the form of pre and post study, without control group, and in hospital. Interventions were divided into two categories: educational interventions (19 studies) and multifaceted managerial interventions (8 studies). The most studied outcome (in 11 studies) was KAP (knowledge, attitude and practice). The mean standard difference of interventions on KAP was estimated 3.04 (2.54–3.54) which was significant statistically (P<0.05). Also, interventions were considerably effective in improving the indicators of waste production amount, waste management costs and overall waste management performance. Conclusion: Despite positive effect of interventions, due to the methodological deficiencies of published studies and high heterogeneity in results of studies, caution should be exercised in interpreting and using the results of the studies.

Health Care Waste Management Improvement Interventions Specifications and Results: A Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis