Project description:Although the amount of waste photovoltaic (PV) panels is expected to grow exponentially in the next decades, little research on the resource efficiency of their recycling has been conducted so far. The article analyses the performance of different processes for the recycling of crystalline silicon PV waste, in a life cycle perspective. The life cycle impacts of the recycling are compared, under different scenarios, to the environmental benefits of secondary raw materials recovered. Base-case recycling has a low efficiency and, in some cases, not even in line with legislative targets. Conversely, high-efficient recycling can meet these targets and allows to recover high quality materials (as silicon, glass and silver) that are generally lost in base-case recycling. The benefits due to the recovery of these materials counterbalance the larger impacts of the high-efficiency recycling process. Considering the full life cycle of the panel, the energy produced by the panel grants the most significant environmental benefits. However, benefits due to high-efficient recycling are relevant for some impact categories, especially for the resource depletion indicator. The article also points out that thermal treatments are generally necessary to grant the high efficiency in the recycling. Nevertheless, these treatments have to be carefully assessed since they can be responsible for the emissions of air pollutants (as hydrogen fluoride potentially released from the combustion of halogenated plastics in the panel's backsheet). The article also identifies and assesses potential modifications to the high-efficiency recycling process, including the delocalisation of some treatments for the optimisation of waste transport and the introduction of pyrolysis in the thermal processing of the waste. Finally, recommendations for product designers, recyclers and policymakers are discussed, in order to improve the resource efficiency of future PV panels.
Project description:The plant RNA degradome was defined as an aggregate of the RNA fragments degraded from various biochemical pathways, such as RNA turnover, maturation and quality surveillance. In recent years, the degradome sequencing (degradome-seq) libraries became a rich storehouse for researchers to study on RNA processing and regulation. Here, we provided a brief overview of the uses of degradome-seq data in plant RNA biology, especially on non-coding RNA processing and small RNA-guided target cleavages. Some novel applications in RNA research area, such as in vivo mapping of the endoribonucleolytic cleavage sites, identification of conserved motifs at the 5' ends of the uncapped RNA fragments, and searching for the protein-binding regions on the transcripts, were also mentioned. More importantly, we proposed a model for the biologists to deduce the contributions of transcriptional and/or post-transcriptional regulation to gene differential expression based on degradome-seq data. Finally, we hope that the degradome-based analytical methods could be widely applied for the studies on RNA biology in eukaryotes.
Project description:Full realization of the value of the loxP-flanked alleles generated by the International Knockout Mouse Consortium will require a large set of well-characterized cre-driver lines. However, many cre driver lines display excision activity beyond the intended tissue or cell type, and these data are frequently unavailable to the potential user. Here we describe a high-throughput pipeline to extend characterization of cre driver lines to document excision activity in a wide range of tissues at multiple time points and disseminate these data to the scientific community. Our results show that the majority of cre strains exhibit some degree of unreported recombinase activity. In addition, we observe frequent mosaicism, inconsistent activity and parent-of-origin effects. Together, these results highlight the importance of deep characterization of cre strains, and provide the scientific community with a critical resource for cre strain information.
Project description:Literature about healthcare-associated infection (HCAI) in China is scarce. A cross-sectional anonymous survey was conducted on 647 clinicians (199 physicians and 448 nurses) from six Shanghai hospitals (grades A-C) to investigate their cognizance, knowledge, attitude, self-reported practice, and risks regarding HCAI with emphasis on precautions. The mean overall score of HCAI knowledge was 40.89±11.4 (mean±SD; range, 13∼72) out of 100 for physicians and 43.48±9.9 (10∼70) for nurses. The respondents generally received high scores in hand hygiene, HCAI core concept, and healthcare worker safety but low scores in HCAI pathogen identification and isolation precautions. There were substantial variations in the knowledge scores of various demographic groups across individual hospitals and within hospital grades (ps<0.05). Within-hospital comparisons showed that the nurses were better than physicians particularly in hand hygiene knowledge in 4 hospitals (ps<0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that longer work experience was inversely and independently associated with the overall and categorical knowledge of nurses, whereas independent associations between older age or higher education and categorical knowledge were noted for physicians. The respondents' self-reported practices and adherence to standard precautions were less than satisfactory. This multi-center study reports a high level of cognizance, patchy knowledge, suboptimal adherence to infection control precautions, and self-protective attitudes among the practicing clinicians regarding HCAI, with potential safety risk to patients and healthcare providers. Providing quality learning resources, enforcing knowledge-informed practice, and promoting a healthcare safety culture are recommended as interventions. Future studies are warranted for social and behavioral aspects of healthcare safety with emphasis on infection control.
Project description:Background: It is unclear if the burden associated with schizophrenia is affected by the type and severity of patient's symptoms. Objective: This study aims to quantify healthcare resource use associated with different profiles of schizophrenia symptoms. Study design: Post-hoc analysis of data from a naturalistic follow-up study. Setting: Secondary psychiatric services in France, Germany and the UK. Patients: EuroSC cohort:, representative sample of 1,208 schizophrenia patients Main outcome measure: We classified patients into eight health states, according to the Lenert classification (HS1-HS8), and estimated 6-month healthcare resource use (outpatient and day clinic visits, and hospitalisations) across the health states. Results: Approximately half of the patients were classed as having mild symptoms (HS1), with around 20% experiencing moderate, predominantly negative symptoms (HS2). The remaining health states were represented by <10% of patients each. Very few patients experienced extremely severe symptoms (HS8). No health state was associated with excess utilisation across all resource types. In terms of outpatient visits, patients were estimated to see a psychiatrist most often (3.01-4.15 visits over 6 months). Hospital admission was needed in 11%(HS1) - 35%(HS8) of patients and inpatient stays were generally prolonged for all health states (39-57 days). The average number of inpatient days was highest for patients in HS8 (18.17 days), followed by patients with severe negative symptoms (HS4; 13.37 days). In other health states characterised by severe symptoms (HS5-HS7), the average number of inpatient days was approximately half of those seen for HS4 (6.09-7.66). Conclusion: While none of the symptom profiles was associated with excess resource usage, hospitalization days were highest for HS with severe, predominantly negative or extremely severe symptoms. Patients with predominantly negative, moderate or severe symptoms appeared to have a high number of psychologist visits - an interesting finding that may reflect a specific therapeutic approach to the treatment of these patients.
Project description:BackgroundAdmissions to intensive treatment (i.e., inpatient [IP] and/or day patient [DP]) for individuals with severe anorexia nervosa (AN) are common. Growing literature indicates potential risks and benefits of each intensive treatment approach; however, existing research has focused on patient and carer perspectives of these treatments. Also, there is scant empirical evidence available for guiding the parameters of intensive treatments for AN. We therefore explored clinicians' perspectives and experience of supporting adults with severe AN in intensive settings.MethodsWe conducted twenty one semi-structured interviews with clinicians who deliver intensive treatments (i.e., IP and/or DP) for individuals with severe AN across four specialist Eating Disorder Services in the United Kingdom between May 2020 and June 2021. We asked clinicians about their views and experiences of supporting individuals with severe AN in intensive treatment settings and the challenges and opportunities associated with IP and DP treatment. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis supported by NVivo software.ResultsFive broad and interrelated themes were identified: (1) Intensive Support; (2) The Severity of Patients' Illnesses; (3) Hope and Recovery; (4) Which Treatment When; (5) Limited Resources; and (6) Carer Burden. We identified various similarities between the two intensive treatment approaches, including the value of intensive and multidisciplinary support and carer involvement, and the challenge of managing complex and unique needs in resource-limited intensive settings. We also found differences in the relationship of treatment to patients' home environments, the necessity of patient motivation, and the management of risk.ConclusionsBoth intensive treatment settings are valued by clinicians; however, there are unique challenges and opportunities for supporting individuals with severe AN within each. Our findings suggest DP treatment may be used as an alternative to IP treatment for individuals with severe AN. However, clear questions remain over which intensive treatment setting is best suited to which patient when and should be the focus of future research.
Project description:A growing body of evidence demonstrates that asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is a major contributor to the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontline healthcare workers in COVID-19 hotspots have faced numerous challenges, including shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) and difficulties acquiring clinical testing. The magnitude of the exposure of healthcare workers and the potential for asymptomatic transmission makes it critical to understand the incidence of infection in this population. To determine the prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst healthcare workers, we studied frontline staff working in the Montefiore Health System in New York City. All participants were asymptomatic at the time of testing and were tested by RT-qPCR and for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The medical, occupational, and COVID-19 exposure histories of participants were recorded via questionnaires. Of the 98 asymptomatic healthcare workers tested, 19 (19.4%) tested positive by RT-qPCR and/or ELISA. Within this group, four (4.1%) were RT-qPCR positive, and four (4.1%) were PCR and IgG positive. Notably, an additional 11 (11.2%) individuals were IgG positive without a positive PCR. Two PCR positive individuals subsequently developed COVID-19 symptoms, while all others remained asymptomatic at 2-week follow-up. These results indicate that there is considerable asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 within the healthcare workforce, despite current mitigation policies. Furthermore, presuming that asymptomatic staff are not carrying SARS-CoV-2 is inconsistent with our results, and this could result in amplified transmission within healthcare settings. Consequently, aggressive testing regiments, such as testing frontline healthcare workers on a regular, multi-modal basis, may be required to prevent further spread within the workforce and to patients.
Project description:ObjectiveClinicians and healthcare organizations are ethically obligated to treat patients with respect, yet it is not clear what actions best demonstrate respect to patients. This exploratory qualitative study aimed to understand what actions on both an individual and organizational level effectively demonstrate respect for primary care patients.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with primary care patients in an integrated healthcare delivery system in Oregon and an integrated safety net health system in Colorado who were participating in a genomics implementation research study of a hereditary cancer screening program. We systematically coded interview transcripts using a coding framework developed based on iterative review of the interview guide and transcripts. We further analyzed the data coded with sub-codes relating to patients' experiences with respect in healthcare using a descriptive content analysis approach.ResultsWe interviewed 40 English-speaking (n = 30, 75%) and Spanish-speaking (n = 10, 25%) patients. Most interviewees identified as female (n = 35, 88%) and either Hispanic/Latino(a) (n = 17, 43%) or White or European American (n = 15, 38%). Interviewees identified two categories of efforts by individual clinicians that demonstrate respect: engaging with patients and being transparent. They identified five efforts by healthcare organizations: promoting safety and inclusivity, protecting patient privacy, communicating about scheduling, navigating financial barriers to care, and ensuring continuity of care.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that patients' experiences of respect depend on efforts by individual clinicians as well as healthcare organizations. Our findings offer insight into how clinicians can build stronger partnerships with patients and how organizations can seek to promote access to care and patient safety and comfort. They also illustrate areas for future research and quality improvement to more effectively respect patients.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death in the USA. Reducing the population-level burden of CVD disease will require a better understanding and support of cardiovascular health (CVH) in individuals and entire communities. The objectives for this study were to examine associations between community-level healthcare resources (HCrRes) and CVH in individuals and entire communities. SETTING:This study consisted of a retrospective, cross-sectional study design, using multivariable epidemiological analyses. PARTICIPANTS:All participants in the 2011 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey were examined for eligibility. CVH, defined using the American Heart Association CVH Index (CVHI), was determined using self-reported responses to 2011 BRFSS questions. Data for determining HCrRes were obtained from the Area Health Resource File. Regression analysis was performed to examine associations between healthcare resources and CVHI in communities (linear regression) and individuals (Poisson regression). RESULTS:Mean CVHI was 3.3±0.005?and was poorer in the Southeast and Appalachian regions of the USA. Supply of primary care physicians and physician assistants were positively associated with individual and community-level CVHI, while CVD specialist supply was negatively associated with CVHI. Individuals benefiting most from increased supply of primary care providers were: middle aged; female; had non-Hispanic other race/ethnicity; those with household income <$25 000/year; and those in non-urban communities with insurance coverage. CONCLUSIONS:Our results support the importance of primary care provider supply for both individual and community CVHI, though not all sociodemographic groups benefited equally from additional primary care providers. Further research should investigate policies and factors that can effectively increase primary care provider supply and influence where they practice.
Project description:BackgroundGranular data related to the likelihood of individuals of different ages accessing acute and critical care services over time is lacking.MethodsWe used population-based, administrative data from Ontario to identify residents of specific ages (20, 30, 40, etc. to 100) on January 1st every year from 1995-2019. We assessed rates of emergency department (ED) visits (2003-19), hospitalizations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (2003-19), and mechanical ventilation.FindingsOverall the 25-year study period, ED were the most common acute healthcare encounter with 100-year-olds having the lowest rate (138.7/1,000) and 90-year-olds the highest (378.5/1,000). Rates of hospitalization ranged from 24.2/1,000 for those age 20 up to 224.9/1,000 for those age 90. Rates of ICU admission and mechanical ventilation were lowest for those age 20 (1.0 and 0.4/1,000), more than tripled by age 50 (3.3 and 1.7/1,000) and peaked at age 80 (20.3 and 10.1/1,000). Over time rates of ED visits increased (164.3 /1,000 in 2003 vs 199.1 /1,000 in 2019) as did rates of invasive mechanical ventilation (2.0/1,000 in 1995 vs 2.9/1,000 in 2019), whereas rates of ICU admission remained stable (4.8/1,000 in 2003 vs 4.9/1,000 in 2019) and hospitalization declined (66.8/1,000 in 1995 vs 51.5/1,000 in 2019). Age stratified analysis demonstrated that rates of ED presentation increased for those age 70 and younger while hospitalization decreased for all age groups; ICU admission and mechanical ventilation rates changed variably by age, with increasing rates demonstrated primarily among people under the age of 50.InterpretationRates of hospitalizations have decreased over time across all age groups, whereas rates of ED presentation, ICU admissions, and mechanical ventilation have increased, primarily driven by younger adults. These findings suggest that although the delivery of healthcare may be moving away from inpatient medicine, there is a growing population of young adults requiring significant healthcare resources.