Informe de expediente civil No. 4789-1998 sobre responsabilidad civil. Informe de expediente administrativo No. 061-2006-CCD y 093-2006/CCD sobre: competencia desleal

Materia: Responsabilidad Civil Nº de Expediente: 4789-1998 Por medio del presente informe, se realiza un análisis sobre un proceso en materia de Responsabilidad Civil extracontractual, mediante el cual se discute si una persona actuó o no bajo el ejercicio regular de un derecho al interponer una denuncia penal contra ciertos miembros de la Junta Directiva de la Asociación en la que formaba parte. Materia: Competencia Desleal Nº de Expediente: 061-2006-CCD Y 093-2006/CCD Por medio del presente informe, se realiza un análisis sobre un procedimiento administrativo sancionador en materia de competencia desleal inciado por la Comisión de Represión de la Competencia Desleal del Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de la Protección de la Propiedad Intelectual (INDECOPI), mediante el cual se alega una presunta infracción contra los principios de legalidad y veracidad, recogidos en el derogado Decreto Legislativo Nº 691 – Normas de la Publicidad en Defensa del Consimidor y que actualmente se encuentran establecidos en el Decreto Legislativo Nº 1044 – Ley de Represión de la Competencia Desleal

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries