Produção de silagem de milho em sistemas de integração lavoura pecuária floresta.

Editores técnicos: João de Mendonça Naime, Caue Ribeiro, Maria Alice Martins, Elaine Cristina Paris, Paulino Ribeiro Villas Boas, Ladislau Marcelino Rabello

Malaria vector species in Colombia: a review

Here we present a comprehensive review of the literature on the vectorial importance of the major Anopheles malaria vectors in Colombia. We provide basic information on the geographical distribution, altitudinal range, immature habitats, adult behaviour, feeding preferences and anthropophily, endophily and infectivity rates. We additionally review information on the life cycle, longevity and population fluctuation of Colombian Anopheles species. Emphasis was placed on the primary vectors that have been epidemiologically incriminated in malaria transmission: Anopheles darlingi, Anopheles albimanus and Anopheles nuneztovari. The role of a selection of local, regional or secondary vectors (e.g., Anopheles pseudopunctipennis and Anopheles neivai) is also discussed. We highlight the importance of combining biological, morphological and molecular data for the correct taxonomical determination of a given species, particularly for members of the species complexes. We likewise emphasise the importance of studying the bionomics of primary and secondary vectors along with an examination of the local conditions affecting the transmission of malaria. The presence and spread of the major vectors and the emergence of secondary species capable of transmitting human Plasmodia are of great interest. When selecting control measures, the anopheline diversity in the region must be considered. Variation in macroclimate conditions over a species' geographical range must be well understood and targeted to plan effective control measures based on the population dynamics of the local Anopheles species

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

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

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