Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Sustainability ; 14(7):4021, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1785929

ABSTRACT

The average share of nuclear energy in electricity production is expected to increase under the background of the global pursuit towards carbon neutrality. Conjugating with its rapid development, the wave of decommissioning and dismantling (D&D) of nuclear facilities is coming. The surface decontamination is a prerequisite to D&D, which will make it easier and reduce the volume of radioactive wastes. However, there are no comprehensive studies on the decontamination methods, which is not helpful for the sustainable development of nuclear energy and environment protection. Therefore, in this work, the current status and future trends of global energy and nuclear energy are first analyzed. Then, various decontamination approaches are comparatively studied, including cleaning mechanisms, application subjects, and intrinsic advantages and disadvantages. Finally, the criteria and factors for selecting a decontamination process, the challenges, and future studies are directed. Among the mechanical methods, laser-based cleaning is high-speed, having automation ability, and thus is promising, although it creates a dust and airborne contaminant hazard. In further studies, factors such as selecting a proper laser facility, optimizing operating parameters, and designing a high-efficiency dust collection system could be studied. Regarding the chemical method, chemical gels are good for decontaminating complex shapes and vertical and overhead surfaces. In addition, they can enhance other decon agents’ efficiency by improving contact time. However, the formulation of colloidal gels is complex and no gel type is useful for all contaminants. Therefore, novel and versatile gels need be developed to enlarge their application field. Combining various decontamination methods will often have better results and thus a reasonable and effective combination of these decontamination methods has become the main direction.

2.
BMJ ; 369: m1849, 2020 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495142

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 16 government designated covid-19 treatment centres in China, 11 to 29 February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 150 patients admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed covid-19 were included in the intention to treat analysis (75 patients assigned to hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care, 75 to standard of care alone). INTERVENTIONS: Hydroxychloroquine administrated at a loading dose of 1200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 mg daily (total treatment duration: two or three weeks for patients with mild to moderate or severe disease, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Negative conversion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by 28 days, analysed according to the intention to treat principle. Adverse events were analysed in the safety population in which hydroxychloroquine recipients were participants who received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine non-recipients were those managed with standard of care alone. RESULTS: Of 150 patients, 148 had mild to moderate disease and two had severe disease. The mean duration from symptom onset to randomisation was 16.6 (SD 10.5; range 3-41) days. A total of 109 (73%) patients (56 standard of care; 53 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) had negative conversion well before 28 days, and the remaining 41 (27%) patients (19 standard of care; 22 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) were censored as they did not reach negative conversion of virus. The probability of negative conversion by 28 days in the standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine group was 85.4% (95% confidence interval 73.8% to 93.8%), similar to that in the standard of care group (81.3%, 71.2% to 89.6%). The difference between groups was 4.1% (95% confidence interval -10.3% to 18.5%). In the safety population, adverse events were recorded in 7/80 (9%) hydroxychloroquine non-recipients and in 21/70 (30%) hydroxychloroquine recipients. The most common adverse event in the hydroxychloroquine recipients was diarrhoea, reported in 7/70 (10%) patients. Two hydroxychloroquine recipients reported serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of hydroxychloroquine did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion than standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with mainly persistent mild to moderate covid-19. Adverse events were higher in hydroxychloroquine recipients than in non-recipients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2000029868.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , COVID-19 , China , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL