ABSTRACT
Sub-metered energy use of an in-slab gas hydronic heating system and a newly installed split system air conditioner in thermodynamically-equivalent classrooms are compared during unoccupied (with artificially imposed internal heat gains) and occupied periods. A preliminary comparison is also undertaken to quantify the heating penalty for the existing gas-fuelled hydronic heating systems when windows remain open (e.g. to comply with COVID-19 guidelines in schools) against the energy needed for heating by the same system in a control classroom with windows closed. The performance evaluation of the heating systems during three unoccupied days where internal heat gains were artificially imposed demonstrated that the gas hydronic system used 41.5 kWh of metered energy while the AC split system used 7.2 kWh, with the AC split system being able to maintain the internal conditions above the set point by operating for approximately-one third of the time the hydronic system was operating. Occupied tests confirmed the observations of the unoccupied tests of equivalent operation. Over a period of 2 occupied winter weeks, the in-slab gas hydronic heating system used 274.6 kWh of metered energy and operated for 35¼ hrs, while the AC split system used 34.7 kWh and operated for 22¼ hrs, albeit on some occasions the occupants in the AC split system's classroom chose not to turn on the system. After selecting days from this occupied period when both systems were used for long periods, it was observed that the AC split system used approximately 4 to 7 times less metered energy than the in-slab gas hydronic system (or 3.3 times in terms of primary energy when worse-case primary energy factors were used). Finally, from the preliminary test, the parallel measurements also confirmed that the additional ventilation in schools through opening of windows increases the energy use of the hydronic heating system;66.8 kWh were measured for heating needs over a period of 3-days as opposed to 25 kWh for the windows open and closed cases respectively. These precise values are, however dependent on the season and building type. © 2022 Elsevier B.V.
ABSTRACT
S44 Table 1Summary of significant medical events, thoracic computed tomography (CT) and pulmonary function tests (PFTs) in ORBCEL-C and placebo groups at 1 year follow upORBCEL-C Placebo Number of patients followed up 20 21 Significant medical events Number of patients with SMEs 6/20 9/21 Total SME events 7 11 Classification Respiratory,thoracic and mediastinal disorders 4 6 Neoplasm - benign, malignant, unspecified 1 0 Infections and infestations 1 1 Cardiac disorders 1 0 Metabolism and nutrition disorders 0 1 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications 0 1 Renal and urinary disorders 0 1 Gastrointestinal disorders 0 1 Thoracic CT Number of CTs available 5 8 Time to CT (Median, IQR) 181 (157–198) 203 (95–233) Evidence of ILD on CT 4 6 PFTs Number of PFTs available 10 8 Time to PFTs (Median, IQR) 184.5 (117.5–292.75) 203.5 (118.25–242.5) FEV1 (Mean, SD) 84.9 (13.6) 80.5 (13.3) FEV1 <80% predicted (n,%) 4/10 (44%) 4/8 (50%) FVC (Mean, SD) 78.4 (13.2) 79.3 (16.5) FVC <80% predicted (n,%) 5/10 (55%) 5/8 (62.5%) FEV1/FVC ratio (Mean, SD, n) 0.88 (0.12) N=8 0.76 (0.05) N=5 FEV1/FVC <0.7 (n,%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) TLCO (Mean, SD, n) 78.9 (14.8) N=9 61.9 (13.4) N=7 TLCO <80% (n,%) 6/9 (66.7%) 7/7 (100%) ConclusionsOne year follow up supports the safety of ORBCEL-C MSCs in patients with moderate to severe ARDS due to COVID-19. A similar incidence of pulmonary dysfunction is reported in both groups at long term follow up.Please refer to page A?? for declarations of interest related to this .
ABSTRACT
Background The COVID-19 pandemic has placed healthcare systems worldwide under unprecedented pressure, with the Irish Public Health system no different. To strengthen delivery of Essential Public Health Functions (EPHFs) and increase future pandemic preparedness, Public Health leaders are now focused on identifying learnings from the pandemic. Within Ireland, given their experience, organisations situated within the Public Health system may be in a unique position to provide valuable information around the delivery of EPHFs, both prior to and in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, and how this can be improved in the future. Methods An online survey was distributed by the Department of Health, from 2 March 2022 to 25 March 2022, amongst organisations situated within the Public Health domain in Ireland. The survey consisted of six open-ended questions around the delivery of EPHFs prior to and in light of the pandemic, success stories that could provide scalable solutions to EPHF delivery and current health system barriers, key areas in the public health system that require strengthening, and barriers to achieving these actions. Thematic analysis to identify key themes was conducted on survey responses. Results Twenty-eight organisational responses were received. Themes around the workforce were apparent throughout, with staff training, staff diversity and staff morale, identified as areas for strengthening EPHF delivery. Themes around ICT, data collection and research were frequently identified with a lack of adequate ICT identified as a key lesson from the pandemic, while the Public Health ICT strategy was identified as key to strengthening future EPHF delivery. Conclusions In general, themes around the workforce;leadership, management and governance and ICT, data collection and research were reoccurring across organisational responses and therefore may be key areas for consideration when strengthening delivery of the EPHFs in Ireland. Speakers/Panelist Louise Hendricks Department of Health, Ireland Sohel Saikat WHO, Geneva, Switzerland