Typological Seismic Risk Maps for Italy

2011 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 907-926 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Rota ◽  
Andrea Penna ◽  
Claudio Strobbia ◽  
Guido Magenes
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Risk ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Fragility Curves ◽  
Reliable Data ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Building Stock ◽  
Risk Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Hazard Vulnerability ◽  
Risk Maps ◽  
Italian Territory

This paper describes the methodology followed to derive typological seismic risk maps for Italy and then presents the results. In its classical definition, seismic risk is obtained from the convolution of hazard, vulnerability and exposure. Due to the absence of reliable data on exposure for the entire Italian territory, this study proposes typological seismic risk maps, obtained by simply convolving hazard and vulnerability for several building typologies characteristic of the Italian building stock. A specific hazard study in terms of PGA has been carried out. The results have then been convolved with empirical typological fragility curves, that were derived from data collected during post-earthquake surveys after the main Italian events of the last 30 years. Useful applications can be found for the typological seismic risk maps, both for risk mitigation strategies and for purely economical evaluations (e.g., insurance and reinsurance studies).

SEISMIC RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT OF INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES: CASE STUDY ON A BLACK CARBON PLANT

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Karagiannakis
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Risk ◽  
Numerical Models ◽  
Fragility Curves ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Economic Losses ◽  
Risk And Resilience ◽  
Industrial Plants ◽  
Plant Equipment

This paper deals with state of the art risk and resilience calculations for industrial plants. Resilience is a top priority issue on the agenda of societies due to climate change and the all-time demand for human life safety and financial robustness. Industrial plants are highly complex systems containing a considerable number of equipment such as steel storage tanks, pipe rack-piping systems, and other installations. Loss Of Containment (LOC) scenarios triggered by past earthquakes due to failure on critical components were followed by severe repercussions on the community, long recovery times and great economic losses. Hence, facility planners and emergency managers should be aware of possible seismic damages and should have already established recovery plans to maximize the resilience and minimize the losses. Seismic risk assessment is the first step of resilience calculations, as it establishes possible damage scenarios. In order to have an accurate risk analysis, the plant equipment vulnerability must be assessed; this is made feasible either from fragility databases in the literature that refer to customized equipment or through numerical calculations. Two different approaches to fragility assessment will be discussed in this paper: (i) code-based Fragility Curves (FCs); and (ii) fragility curves based on numerical models. A carbon black process plant is used as a case study in order to display the influence of various fragility curve realizations taking their effects on risk and resilience calculations into account. Additionally, a new way of representing the total resilience of industrial installations is proposed. More precisely, all possible scenarios will be endowed with their weighted recovery curves (according to their probability of occurrence) and summed together. The result is a concise graph that can help stakeholders to identify critical plant equipment and make decisions on seismic mitigation strategies for plant safety and efficiency. Finally, possible mitigation strategies, like structural health monitoring and metamaterial-based seismic shields are addressed, in order to show how future developments may enhance plant resilience. The work presented hereafter represents a highly condensed application of the research done during the XP-RESILIENCE project, while more detailed information is available on the project website https://r.unitn.it/en/dicam/xp-resilience.

Proactive Actions Based on a Resilient Approach to Urban Seismic Risk Mitigation

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 321-335
Author(s):  
Marco Vona
Keyword(s):  
Urban Planning ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Seismic Risk ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Housing Stock ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Housing System ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Natural Risk ◽  
Seismic Risk Mitigation

Background: Seismic risk mitigation is an important issue in earthquake-prone countries, and needs to be solved in those complex communities governed by complex processes, where urban planning, socioeconomic dynamics, and, often, the need to preserve cultural assets are present simultaneously. In recent years, due to limited financial resources, mitigation activities have often been limited to post-earthquake events, and only a few in periods of inactivity, particularly in urban planning. At this point, a significant change in point of view is necessary. Methods: The seismic risk mitigation (and more generally, natural risk mitigation) must be considered as the main topic in urban planning and in the governance of communities. In fact, in several recent earthquakes, significant socioeconomic losses have been caused by the low or lack of resilience of the communities. This is mainly due to the high vulnerability of private buildings, in particular, housing units. Results: Therefore, in recent years, several studies have been conducted on the seismic resilience of communities. However, significant improvements are still needed for the resilience assessment of the housing stock, both qualitatively and quantitatively. In this study, which is applied to the housing system, a proposal regarding a change in urban planning and emergency management tools based on the concept of resilience is reported. As a first application, a case study in Italy is considered. Conclusion: The proposal is focused on defining and quantifying the improvement of the resilience of the communities and this must be obtained by modifying the current Civil Protection plan. New tools are based on a new resilience community plan by encompassing urban planning tools, resilient mitigation strategies, and consequently, emergency management planning.

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

scholarly journals Restarting elective endoscopy safely amidst an evolving pandemic and the impact of patient perception

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Nguyen ◽  
Kevin T. Kline ◽  
Shehzad Merwat ◽  
Sheharyar Merwat ◽  
Gurinder Luthra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Transmission Risk ◽  
Dynamic Monitoring ◽  
Successful Model ◽  
Outpatient Procedures ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Spread Of Infection ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has led to disruptions in elective and outpatient procedures. Guidance from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services provided a framework for gradual reopening of outpatient clinical operations. As the infrastructure to restart endoscopy has been more clearly described, patient concerns regarding viral transmission during the procedure have been identified. Moreover, the efficacy of the measures in preventing transmission have not been clearly delineated. Methods We identified patients with pandemic-related procedure cancellations from 3/16/2020 to 4/20/2020. Patients were stratified into tier groups (1–4) by urgency. Procedures were performed using our hospital risk mitigation strategies to minimize transmission risk. Patients who subsequently developed symptoms or tested for COVID-19 were recorded. Results Among patients requiring emergent procedures, 57.14% could be scheduled at their originally intended interval. COVID-19 concerns represented the most common rescheduling barrier. No patients who underwent post-procedure testing were positive for COVID-19. No cases of endoscopy staff transmission were identified. Conclusions Non-COVID-19 related patient care during the pandemic is a challenging process that evolved with the spread of infection, requiring dynamic monitoring and protocol optimization. We describe our successful model for reopening endoscopy suites using a tier-based system for safe reintroduction of elective procedures while minimizing transmission to patients and staff. Important barriers included financial and transmission concerns that need to be addressed to enable the return to pre-pandemic utilization of elective endoscopic procedures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document