Author/Authors :
Rafiee، Ata نويسنده Center for Solid Waste Research (CSWR), Institute for Environmental Research (IER), Tehran University of Medical SciencesDepartment of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences , , Yaghmaeian، Kamyar نويسنده Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , , Hoseini، Mohammad نويسنده Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences , , Parmy، Saeid نويسنده Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , , Mahvi، Amir Hossein نويسنده Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Health; National Institute of Health Research; Center for Solid Waste Research, Institute fo , , Yunesian، Masud نويسنده , , Khaefi، Mehran نويسنده Environmental and occupational health center, Ministry of health medical education , , Nabizadeh، Ramin نويسنده Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical SciencesCenter for Air Pollution Research (CAPR), Institute for Environmental Research (IER), Tehran University of Medical Sciences ,
Abstract :
Background: Improper treatment of infectious waste can cause numerous adverse environmental and health effects such as transmission of diseases through health personnel and other susceptible groups,who come in contact with such wastes. On the other hand, selection of appropriate treatment alternatives in infectious waste management has become a challenging task for public health authorities especially in developing countries. The objective of this paper is to select the best infectious waste treatment alternative by the modified Sustainability Assessment of Technologies (SAT) methodology, developed by the International Environmental Technology Center of the United Nations Environment Program (IETC-UNEP). Methods: SAT methodology consists of three main components, including screening, scoping and detailed assessment. In screening, different infectious waste treatment alternatives undergo screening using the finalized environmental and technical criteria. Short-listed treatment options from the previous step, then go through the comprehensive scoping and detailed assessment (2nd and 3rd components) which is more qualitative and quantitative in nature. An empirical case in Tehran, the largest city in Iran, is provided to illustrate the potential of the proposed methodology. Results: According to the final score, “Hydroclave”, was the most suitable infectious treatment technology. The ranking order of the treatment alternatives were “Autoclave with a shredder”, “Autoclave”, “Central Incineration” and “chemical treatment” on the basis of technical, economical, social and environmental aspects and their related criteria. Conclusions: According to the results it could be concluded that the top ranking technologies basically have higher scores in all the aspects. Hence it is easier to arrive at a decision for the final technology selection based on the principles of sustainability
