10 research outputs found

    Distributional implications of environmental taxation in Denmark

    Get PDF
    Environmental taxes imposed on households have been introduced in many countries. However, few countries have reached the level of environmental taxation that is seen in Denmark today, although many are considering shifting the tax burden towards the consumption that is harming the environment. The total tax burden imposed on households in Denmark in the form of taxes on energy use of all kinds, water consumption and waste production, etc., is considerable. This paper analyses the individual taxes as well as the combination of all these taxes and duties related to environmental concerns, including taxes on heating, transport fuels, electricity, water, waste, plastic bags, registration of cars, annual car use, pesticides, etc. The distributional effect of taxes is examined in relation to household income, socio-economic class, residential location and family status. The shifting of the tax structure from high marginal income tax to consumption-based taxes, especially environmental taxes, might have distributional impacts amongst income groups which have not been considered part of the tax policy. The taxes are compared with respect to distributional impact. Do the effects of the different taxes vary to such an extent that this should be considered when designing tax policies? The hypothesis is that some environmental taxes associated with luxury income are less regressive than the average environmental tax. The results suggest that in Denmark taxes on petrol and registration duties for cars are progressive, whereas most other environmental taxes are regressive, especially the green taxes on water, retail containers and CO2. The distributional impacts are illustrated using household consumption survey data and data covering household expenditures on energy. The energy taxes and the more recently introduced green taxes are compared

    Simulated impacts of winter rye cover crop on continuous corn yield and soil parameters

    Get PDF
    Cover crops (CC) provide numerous ecosystem services such as improving soil health, reducing nutrient loss, increasing productivity, and mitigating greenhouse gas emission. However, adoption of CC has been hindered by perceived negative impacts on main crop productivity and additional production costs. This is partly attributed to the gap in current state of knowledge in CC and its interaction with main crop production under different biophysical conditions. In this study, Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer model was used to evaluate the long-term impact of cereal rye (Secale cereale L.) on corn (Zea mays L.) yield, soil organic carbon (SOC), nitrate leaching, soil water, and drainage for a range of climate, soil, and irrigation management in Eastern and Central Nebraska. A 30-year (1991–2020) simulation showed no difference in corn yield and SOC between CC and no-cover crop treatments at both sites under irrigated and rainfed conditions. However, CC resulted in reduction of N loss by up to 48% at the Eastern Nebraska Research and Extension Center and 24% at South Central Agricultural Laboratory under irrigation. Cereal rye has no significant effect on total soil water but, a significant reduction in cumulative subsurface drainage of 44% was determined at both sites. This study has shown the possible effect of cover crop on corn crop yield and soil properties over different regions in Nebraska. Future research extending the scope and geographic area is needed to test and quantify possible impacts of multiple CC species under diverse management and biophysical conditions

    Protective ventilation with high versus low positive end-expiratory pressure during one-lung ventilation for thoracic surgery (PROTHOR): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) may result in longer duration of in-hospital stay and even mortality. Both thoracic surgery and intraoperative mechanical ventilation settings add considerably to the risk of PPC. It is unclear if one-lung ventilation (OLV) for thoracic surgery with a strategy of intraoperative high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM) reduces PPC, compared to low PEEP without RM. Methods: PROTHOR is an international, multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, two-arm trial initiated by investigators of the PROtective VEntilation NETwork. In total, 2378 patients will be randomly assigned to one of two different intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged 18 years or older, scheduled for open thoracic or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery under general anesthesia requiring OLV, with a maximal body mass index of 35 kg/m2, and a planned duration of surgery of more than 60 min. Further, the expected duration of OLV shall be longer than two-lung ventilation, and lung separation is planned with a double lumen tube. Patients will be randomly assigned to PEEP of 10 cmH2O with lung RM, or PEEP of 5 cmH2O without RM. During two-lung ventilation tidal volume is set at 7 mL/kg predicted body weight and, during OLV, it will be decreased to 5 mL/kg. The occurrence of PPC will be recorded as a collapsed composite of single adverse pulmonary events and represents the primary endpoint. Discussion: PROTHOR is the first randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with OLV that is adequately powered to compare the effects of intraoperative high PEEP with RM versus low PEEP without RM on PPC. The results of the PROTHOR trial will support anesthesiologists in their decision to set intraoperative PEEP during protective ventilation for OLV in thoracic surgery. Trial registration: The trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02963025) on 15 November 2016

    Effect of Intraoperative High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With Recruitment Maneuvers vs Low PEEP on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Obese Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial (vol 321, pg 2292, 2019)

    No full text
    status: publishe

    Effect of Intraoperative High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With Recruitment Maneuvers vs Low PEEP on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Obese Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

    No full text
    IMPORTANCE An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain

    Effect of intraoperative high Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) with recruitment maneuvers vs low PEEP on postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients : a randomized clinical trial

    No full text
    IMPORTANCE An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a higher level of PEEP with alveolar recruitment maneuvers decreases postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients undergoing surgery compared with a lower level of PEEP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized clinical trial of 2013 adults with body mass indices of 35 or greater and substantial risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were undergoing noncardiac, nonneurological surgery under general anesthesia. The trial was conducted at 77 sites in 23 countries from July 2014-February 2018; final follow-up: May 2018. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to the high level of PEEP group (n = 989), consisting of a PEEP level of 12 cm H2O with alveolar recruitment maneuvers (a stepwise increase of tidal volume and eventually PEEP) or to the low level of PEEP group (n = 987), consisting of a PEEP level of 4 cm H2O. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with a tidal volume of 7 mL/kg of predicted body weight. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomewas a composite of pulmonary complications within the first 5 postoperative days, including respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, bronchospasm, new pulmonary infiltrates, pulmonary infection, aspiration pneumonitis, pleural effusion, atelectasis, cardiopulmonary edema, and pneumothorax. Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were intraoperative complications, including hypoxemia (oxygen desaturation with SpO(2) 1 minute). RESULTS Among 2013 adults who were randomized, 1976 (98.2%) completed the trial (mean age, 48.8 years; 1381 [69.9%] women; 1778 [90.1%] underwent abdominal operations). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 211 of 989 patients (21.3%) in the high level of PEEP group compared with 233 of 987 patients (23.6%) in the low level of PEEP group (difference, -2.3%[95% CI, -5.9% to 1.4%]; risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.04]; P =.23). Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 were not significantly different between the high and low level of PEEP groups, and 3 were significantly different, including fewer patients with hypoxemia (5.0% in the high level of PEEP group vs 13.6% in the low level of PEEP group; difference, -8.6%[95% CI, -11.1% to 6.1%]; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among obese patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia, an intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategy with a higher level of PEEP and alveolar recruitment maneuvers, compared with a strategy with a lower level of PEEP, did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications

    Intraoperative positive end-expiratory pressure and postoperative pulmonary complications: a patient-level meta-analysis of three randomised clinical trials.

    No full text

    The management of acute venous thromboembolism in clinical practice - study rationale and protocol of the European PREFER in VTE Registry

    Get PDF
    Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major health problem, with over one million events every year in Europe. However, there is a paucity of data on the current management in real life, including factors influencing treatment pathways, patient satisfaction, quality of life (QoL), and utilization of health care resources and the corresponding costs. The PREFER in VTE registry has been designed to address this and to understand medical care and needs as well as potential gaps for improvement. Methods/design: The PREFER in VTE registry was a prospective, observational, multicenter study conducted in seven European countries including Austria, France Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK to assess the characteristics and the management of patients with VTE, the use of health care resources, and to provide data to estimate the costs for 12 months treatment following a first-time and/or recurrent VTE diagnosed in hospitals or specialized or primary care centers. In addition, existing anticoagulant treatment patterns, patient pathways, clinical outcomes, treatment satisfaction, and health related QoL were documented. The centers were chosen to reflect the care environment in which patients with VTE are managed in each of the participating countries. Patients were eligible to be enrolled into the registry if they were at least 18 years old, had a symptomatic, objectively confirmed first time or recurrent acute VTE defined as either distal or proximal deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or both. After the baseline visit at the time of the acute VTE event, further follow-up documentations occurred at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Follow-up data was collected by either routinely scheduled visits or by telephone calls. Results: Overall, 381 centers participated, which enrolled 3,545 patients during an observational period of 1 year. Conclusion: The PREFER in VTE registry will provide valuable insights into the characteristics of patients with VTE and their acute and mid-term management, as well as into drug utilization and the use of health care resources in acute first-time and/or recurrent VTE across Europe in clinical practice. Trial registration: Registered in DRKS register, ID number: DRKS0000479
    corecore