scholarly journals Controlling hepatitis E virus in the pig production sector: Assessment of the technical and behavioural feasibility of on-farm risk mitigation strategies

2020 ◽  
Vol 175 ◽  
pp. 104866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Teixeira-Costa ◽  
Mathieu Andraud ◽  
Nicolas Rose ◽  
Morgane Salines
Keyword(s):  
Hepatitis E Virus ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Hepatitis E ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Production Sector ◽  
Pig Production ◽  
Risk Mitigation Strategies ◽  
On Farm

scholarly journals Risk Mitigation Strategies in Semi-Organic Rice Supply Chains: Lesson Learned from the Involved Actors

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-255
Author(s):  
Agustina Shinta Hartati Wahyuningtyas ◽  
Novi Haryati ◽  
Destyana Ellingga Pratiwi ◽  
Luisa Maliny Situmeang
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Rice Farmers ◽  
Risk Mitigation Strategies ◽  
The Government ◽  
Quantitative Descriptive ◽  
On Farm ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Rice is the main consumption food for Indonesians. The demand for food increased from 114.6 kg per capita in 2016 to 124.89 kg in 2017. However, rice farmers and supply chain actors in rice agribusiness have experienced high challenges, such as production, transportation, price, product quality, and the environment. This research aimed to understand actors involved in the supply chain, their perception of occurring risks, and evaluation and risk mitigation in the supply chain. This was a quantitative descriptive study done purposively in Watugede Village, Singosari Sub-District, Malang Regency. Non-probability sampling was taken to gather primary data. The respondent of this research was 16 involved actors, from on-farm actors to consumers. The data were analyzed using the Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) to provide descriptive risk mitigation strategies. The results show that six involved actors are suppliers, farmers, grinders, traders, and buyers. Each actor faces different risks, and thus, the recommended mitigation strategies are adjusted to their risks. Sharing information, optimizing the level of supply availability, measuring supply chain performance, and building more coordination with the government are the best strategies to mitigate risks.

scholarly journals Infection dynamics and persistence of hepatitis E virus on pig farms – a review

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Meester ◽  
T. J. Tobias ◽  
M. Bouwknegt ◽  
N. E. Kusters ◽  
J. A. Stegeman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Hepatitis E Virus ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Transmission Rate ◽  
Hepatitis E ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Genotype 3 ◽  
Infection Dynamics ◽  
Pig Farms ◽  
Slaughter Pigs

Abstract Background Hepatitis E virus (HEV) genotype 3 and 4 is a zoonosis that causes hepatitis in humans. Humans can become infected by consumption of pork or contact with pigs. Pigs are the main reservoir of the virus worldwide and the virus is present on most pig farms. Main body Though HEV is present on most farms, the proportion of infected pigs at slaughter and thus the level of exposure to consumers differs between farms and countries. Understanding the cause of that difference is necessary to install effective measures to lower HEV in pigs at slaughter. Here, HEV studies are reviewed that include infection dynamics of HEV in pigs and on farms, risk factors for HEV farm prevalence, and that describe mechanisms and sources that could generate persistence on farms. Most pigs become infected after maternal immunity has waned, at the end of the nursing or beginning of the fattening phase. Risk factors increasing the likelihood of a high farm prevalence or proportion of actively infected slaughter pigs comprise of factors such as farm demographics, internal and external biosecurity and immunomodulating coinfections. On-farm persistence of HEV is plausible, because of a high transmission rate and a constant influx of susceptible pigs. Environmental sources of HEV that enhance persistence are contaminated manure storages, water and fomites. Conclusion As HEV is persistently present on most pig farms, current risk mitigation should focus on lowering transmission within farms, especially between farm compartments. Yet, one should be aware of the paradox of increasing the proportion of actively infected pigs at slaughter by reducing transmission insufficiently. Vaccination of pigs may aid HEV control in the future.

scholarly journals Use of failure modes and effects analysis to mitigate potential risks prior to implementation of an intravenous compounding technology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnes Ann Feemster ◽  
Melissa Augustino ◽  
Rosemary Duncan ◽  
Anand Khandoobhai ◽  
Meghan Rowcliffe
Keyword(s):  
Medication Safety ◽  
Failure Modes ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Hazard Index ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Investigational Drug ◽  
Workflow Optimization ◽  
Proactive Approach ◽  
Risk Mitigation Strategies

Abstract Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Purpose The purpose of this study was to identify potential failure points in a new chemotherapy preparation technology and to implement changes that prevent or minimize the consequences of those failures before they occur using the failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) approach. Methods An FMEA was conducted by a team of medication safety pharmacists, oncology pharmacists and technicians, leadership from informatics, investigational drug, and medication safety services, and representatives from the technology vendor. Failure modes were scored using both Risk Priority Number (RPN) and Risk Hazard Index (RHI) scores. Results The chemotherapy preparation workflow was defined in a 41-step process with 16 failure modes. The RPN and RHI scores were identical for each failure mode because all failure modes were considered detectable. Five failure modes, all attributable to user error, were deemed to pose the highest risk. Mitigation strategies and system changes were identified for 2 failure modes, with subsequent system modifications resulting in reduced risk. Conclusion The FMEA was a useful tool for risk mitigation and workflow optimization prior to implementation of an intravenous compounding technology. The process of conducting this study served as a collaborative and proactive approach to reducing the potential for medication errors upon adoption of new technology into the chemotherapy preparation process.

A Low-Fidelity Stochastic Model of Viral Spread in Aircraft to Assess Risk Mitigation Strategies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leigh McCue
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Traffic Network ◽  
Computationally Efficient ◽  
Passenger Compartment ◽  
Stochastic Effects ◽  
Viral Spread ◽  
Risk Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Baseline Health

Abstract The purpose of this work is to develop a computationally efficient model of viral spread that can be utilized to better understand influences of stochastic factors on a large-scale system - such as the air traffic network. A particle-based model of passengers and seats aboard a single-cabin 737-800 is developed for use as a demonstration of concept on tracking the propagation of a virus through the aircraft's passenger compartment over multiple flights. The model is sufficiently computationally efficient so as to be viable for Monte Carlo simulation to capture various stochastic effects, such as number of passengers, number of initially sick passengers, seating locations of passengers, and baseline health of each passenger. The computational tool is then exercised in demonstration for assessing risk mitigation of intervention strategies, such as passenger-driven cleaning of seating environments and elimination of middle seating.

scholarly journals Management of Cardiac Implantable Electrical Devices in Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Ablation for Spine Pain: Physician Survey and Review of Guidelines

2020 ◽  
Vol 4;23 (7;4) ◽  
pp. E335-E342
Author(s):  
Jason Friedrich
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Radiofrequency Ablation ◽  
Joint Pain ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Electrical Devices ◽  
Risk Mitigation Strategies

Background: More patients with cardiac implantable electrical devices (CIEDs) are presenting to spine and pain practices for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) procedures for chronic pain. Although the potential for electromagnetic interference (EMI) affecting CIED function is known with RFA procedures, available guidelines do not specifically address CIED management for percutaneous RFA for zygapophyseal (z-joint) joint pain, and thus physician practice may vary. Objectives: To better understand current practices of physicians who perform RFA for chronic z-joint pain with respect to management of CIEDs. Perioperative CIED management guidelines are also reviewed to specifically address risk mitigation strategies for potential EMI created by ambulatory percutaneous spine RFA procedures. Study Design: Web-based provider survey and narrative review. Setting: Multispecialty pain clinic, academic medical center. Methods: A web-based survey was created using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). A survey link was provided via e-mail to active members of the Spine Intervention Society (SIS), American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, as well as distributed freely to community Pain Physicians and any receptive academic departments of PM&R or Anesthesiology. The narrative review summarizes pertinent case series, review articles, a SIS recommendation statement, and multi-specialty peri-operative guidelines as they relate specifically to spine RFA procedures. Results: A total of 197 clinicians participated in the survey from diverse clinical backgrounds, including anesthesiology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, radiology, neurosurgery, and neurology, with 81% reporting fellowship training. Survey responses indicate wide variability in provider management of CIEDs before, during, and after RFA for z-joint pain. Respondents indicated they would like more specific guidelines to aid in management and decision-making around CIEDs and spine RFA procedures. Literature review yielded several practice guidelines related to perioperative management of CIEDs, but no specific guideline for percutaneous spine RFA procedures. However, combining the risk mitigation strategies provided in these guidelines, with interventional pain physician clinical experience allows for reasonable management recommendations to aid in decision-making. Limitations: Although this manuscript can serve as a review of CIEDs and aid in management decisions in patients with CIEDs, it is not a clinical practice guideline. Conclusions: Practice patterns vary regarding CIED management in ambulatory spine RFA procedures. CIED presence is not a contraindication for spine RFA but does increase the complexity of a spine RFA procedure and necessitates some added precautions. Key words: Radiofrequency ablation, neurotomy, cardiac implantable electrical device, zygapophyseal joint, spondylosis, neck pain, low back pain, chronic pain

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document