Presented by: Robert Medairos MD
Duke University Medical Center

Introduction

Poster presentations serve a vital function in the dissemination of research at urologic conferences, yet the financial and environmental implications remain unexplored. While accessible alternatives to traditional printed posters exist, a comparative analysis has not been performed. This study aims to compare the economic and environmental impacts of traditional printed poster presentations with various alternative formats at major urological conferences in recent years.

Materials

Conference agendas and number of poster presentations from selected urology conferences in 2021 and 2022 were reviewed. The costs, (US Dollars, $), were based on the average price of standard printing services ($90 for a 36” x 72” poster). The environmental impact from printing the poster was evaluated using the Hewlett-Packard carbon footprint calculator. Comparative estimates for several alternative presentation formats included compact posters ($60 for a 36” x 48”), digital viewing via 43” television (TV) screens, projected posters, and a printed QR code page (8.5” x 11”) linked to an online poster. Energy consumption for two-hour usage of TVs or portable projectors was derived from Energy.gov data.  The assumption was held that posters were printed once for a specific conference. Transportation and shipping costs, as well as the production and recycling of gloss paper and electronics were excluded from the analysis.

Results

,

Table 1 presents the number of posters at selected conferences by year, along with the alternatives. The total cost to presenters in 2021 was $236,340 and $262,710 in 2022. This resulted in 3789 kWh (2021) and 4212 kWh (2022) of energy usage. In contrast, conferences with digital presentations incurred no direct economic cost for poster presentation. The energy required to display posters on a TV screen was estimated to be 263 kWh in 2021 and 292 kWh in 2022, indicating a 93% reduction in energy consumption. A 33% reduction in both costs and carbon emissions was estimated for compact posters.

Conclusion

Traditional posters pose a significant financial and environmental cost. The potential for developing an innovative, sustainable platform for research dissemination warrants further exploration. Potential strategies include conversion to completely digital formats, a hybrid format with online hosting of posters linked to printed QR codes, or standardizing more compact posters.

Funding

N/A

Lead Authors

Austin Livingston, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Co-Authors

Rand Wilcox Vanden Berg, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Jordan Foreman, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Andrew Peterston, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Chuck Scales, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Jodi Antonelli, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Michael Lipkin, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Glenn Preminger, MD
Duke University Medical Center

Robert Medairos, MD
Duke University Medical Center