Minimising waste in clinical trials
Waste reduction should be embedded at the earliest stages of study design
Protocol-level decisions have the greatest leverage on the volume of consumables, samples, and packaging a trial goes on to generate.
GUIDE | July 2026
Why waste is a lever worth pulling
Every kit shipped, sample tube used, and box of IMP manufactured traces back to a decision made somewhere in protocol design, forecasting, or procurement.
Waste generated downstream including expired stock, surplus at study close-out, single-use plastics thrown away after one visit, is almost always cheaper to prevent at the design stage than to manage once it exists.
Understand the impact
Below are some decarbonisation strategies to reduce waste for consideration.
What to weigh alongside carbon:
- COMPLIANCE – Does it still meet GCP, GMP, or infection-control requirements?
- SUPPLY – Does it risk a stock-out or delay at site, or just trim genuine excess?
- INFRASTRUCTURE – Does the site or depot have the training and equipment to make it work?
- REGION – Does the co-benefit hold everywhere the trial runs, or only in some markets?
- NET EFFECT – Does it reduce waste, or just move it to a different point in the chain?
The goal is to remove genuine excess without introducing the kind of shortfall that stops a trial from running.
Protocol waste assessment
Assess the environmental implications of planned procedures during protocol development, to limit unnecessary visits, tests, and materials before the protocol is finalised.
Co-benefits ~ The cheapest and most effective point to remove waste, a test or kit designed out never gets manufactured, shipped, or disposed of. Often overlaps with reducing patient burden and cost, since redundant assessments serve neither science nor sustainability. Creates a reusable template for other protocols in the portfolio.
Trade-offs ~Requires sustainability expertise at the table early, which many protocol teams don’t routinely have. Trimming procedures too aggressively risks losing data that reviewers, or a future indication, may need. Retrofitting this review into a late-stage protocol yields far less benefit, so performing this review early is key to success.
Predictive forecasting and inventory optimisation
Use predictive models, historical data, and scenario modelling to size lab kits, equipment, and IMP accurately, with adaptive resupply and depot-level visibility replacing fixed over-ordering.
Co-benefits ~ Directly cuts oversupply and avoidable end-of-study disposal, one of the largest and most visible waste streams in a trial. Reduces unnecessary manufacturing and transport, so the carbon saving compounds with the waste saving. Depot-level visibility lets sponsors reallocate existing stock between sites instead of ordering fresh.
Trade-offs ~ Forecasts are only as good as the enrolment and dropout data behind them, slow accrual or a protocol amendment can invalidate assumptions quickly. Running too lean risks a supply shortfall that halts dosing at a site, a worse outcome than modest overage. Needs investment in modelling tools and someone accountable for keeping them current.
Smart scanning, labelling and FEFO inventory
Give real-time visibility of expiry dates, automate First-Expiry-First-Out stock rotation, and issue early expiry alerts across sites and depots.
Co-benefits ~ Cuts expiry-driven disposal of kits, reagents, and IMP waste with no clinical benefit whatsoever. Scanning data feeds directly into the forecasting from strategy 02, improving both over time. Reduces last-minute emergency reordering, which tends to be less efficient and higher carbon than planned resupply.
Trade-offs ~ Requires infrastructure and site staff trained to use it consistently, harder to guarantee across a large multi-country network. Adds an IT system that itself needs validation and maintenance. Alerts only help if someone at the site acts on them, process discipline matters as much as the technology
Refurbished or remanufactured equipment
Use validated refurbished or remanufactured equipment where feasible, supported by documented cleaning and tracking processes.
Co-benefits ~ Avoids the manufacturing footprint of new equipment, usually the largest share of a device’s lifecycle impact. Can lower equipment cost, freeing budget elsewhere in the trial. Extends the useful life of assets already in the supply chain rather than replacing them.
Trade-offs ~Every refurbished unit needs the same validated cleaning, calibration, and tracking rigor as new equipment, adding qualification time and documentation. Refurbished stock isn’t always available in the quantity or timeline a study start-up needs. Some equipment categories may not be appropriate to refurbish at all.
Device take-back programmes
Encourage and enable patients to return provisioned electronic devices for appropriate decontamination, recycling, or reuse.
Co-benefits ~ Keeps functioning devices in circulation for future studies instead of becoming e-waste. Decontamination and reuse is far lower-impact than manufacturing replacements. Gives patients a clear, low-effort action that reinforces the trial’s sustainability commitments at close-out.
Trade-offs ~ Return rates depend on patient willingness and a simple process. Without prepaid packaging and reminders, devices are often just kept or discarded. Decontamination and data-wiping must be validated and documented, adding a step a site or central vendor has to manage. Devices returned late or damaged may not be reusable, so a genuine recycling backstop is still needed.
Donate surplus equipment and supplies
Donate surplus equipment or supplies meeting regulatory requirements to charities such as Kits for Life and International Health Partners.
Co-benefits ~ Converts surplus that would otherwise be disposed of into direct benefit for under-resourced healthcare settings. Keeps materials in use rather than in a waste stream. A meaningful reputational and CSR co-benefit alongside the environmental one.
Trade-offs ~Only regulatory-compliant, appropriately labelled, in-date items are eligible, so not all surplus qualifies. Donation logistics including verification, repackaging, shipping to the receiving charity have their own transport footprint and administrative cost. Needs an established charity relationship and clear internal sign-off to avoid ad hoc, inconsistent handling.
