Per una nuova posizione dell'italiano nel quadrilinguismo elvetico. Strumenti e strategie per l'elaborazione di un <i>curriculum</i> minimo di italiano

Mit der Schaffung eines Minimal-Lehrganges in Italienisch sollte eine Brücke geschlagen werden zwischen dem Schulalltag und den Erkenntnissen der Forschung zum Spontanerwerb von Zweitsprachen. Es musste ein Kompromiss gefunden werden zwischen der Normativität des Unterrichts und der sprachlichen Kreativität, die für den Spontanerwerb von Zweitsprachen charakteristisch ist. Der Lehrgang hat zwei Ziele: Zum einen soll das Publikum, 11- bis 13-jährige, nicht italienischsprachige Schüler, die Möglichkeit erhalten, sich eine minimale kommunikative Kompetenz anzueignen, zum anderen soll die Position des Italienischen als Bestandteil der Schweizerischen Identität verbessert werden. Des Weiteren sollte die Einsatzmöglichkeit intensiver Unterrichtsformen untersucht werden. In diesem Artikel werden die Anwendungsbedingungen des Lehrgangs sowie seine Eingliederung in den Schulalltag dargestellt und es werden der allgemeine Aufbau, der Ablauf innerhalb einer Schulwoche und einige Resultate der Schulversuche dargelegt

The impact of Nursing Homes staff education on end-of-life care in residents with advanced dementia: a quality improvement study

Context. End-of-life care in nursing homes (NHs) needs improvement. We carried out a study in 29 NHs in the Lombardy Region (Italy).Objectives. The objective of this study was to compare end-of-life care in NH residents with advanced dementia before and after an educational intervention aimed to improving palliative care.Methods. The intervention consisted of a seven-hour lecture, followed by two 3-hour meetings consisting of case discussions. The intervention was held in each NH and well attended by NH staff. This multicenter, comparative, observational study included up to 20 residents with advanced dementia from each NH: the last 10 who died before the intervention (preintervention group, 245 residents) and the first 10 who died at least three months after the intervention (postintervention group, 237 residents). Data for these residents were collected from records for 60 days and seven days before death.Results. The use of "comfort hydration" (< 1000 mL/day subcutaneously) tended to increase from 16.9% to 26.8% in the postintervention group. The number of residents receiving a palliative approach for nutrition and hydration increased, though not significantly, from 24% preintervention to 31.5% postintervention. On the other hand, the proportion of tube-fed residents and residents receiving intravenous hydration decreased from 15.5% to 10.5%, and from 52% to 42%, respectively. Cardiopulmonary resuscitations decreased also from 52/245 (21%) to 18/237 (7.6%) cases (P = 0.002).Conclusion. The short educational intervention modified some practices relevant to the quality of end-of-life care of advanced dementia patients in NHs, possibly raising and reinforcing beliefs and attitudes already largely present. (C) 2018 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

The last week of life of nursing home residents with advanced dementia: a retrospective study

Background Barriers to palliative care still exist in long-term care settings for older people, which can mean that people with advanced dementia may not receive of adequate palliative care in the last days of their life; instead, they may be exposed to aggressive and/or inappropriate treatments. The aim of this multicentre study was to assess the clinical interventions and care at end of life in a cohort of nursing home (NH) residents with advanced dementia in a large Italian region. Methods This retrospective study included a convenience sample of 29 NHs in the Lombardy Region. Data were collected from the clinical records of 482 residents with advanced dementia, who had resided in the NH for at least 6 months before death, mainly focusing on the 7 days before death. Results Most residents (97.1%) died in the NH. In the 7 days before death, 20% were fed and hydrated by mouth, and 13.4% were tube fed. A median of five, often inappropriate, drugs were prescribed. Fifty-seven percent of residents had an acknowledgement of worsening condition recorded in their clinical records, a median of 4 days before death. Conclusions Full implementation of palliative care was not achieved in our study, possibly due to insufficient acknowledgement of the appropriateness of some drugs and interventions, and health professionals' lack of implementation of palliative interventions. Future studies should focus on how to improve care for NH residents

Safety of the fermentation product of Aspergillus oryzae NRRL 458 (Amaferm®) as a feed additive for dairy cows (Biozyme Inc.)

[EN] Amaferm® is a fermentation product produced by Aspergillus oryzae NRRL 458, containing alpha-amylase and cellulase enzyme activities, authorised for use as a feed additive for dairy cows. In 2016, the applicant requested for the renewal of the authorisation and the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) issued an opinion at that regard in 2020. In that opinion, the Panel could not confirm the previously drawn conclusions (EFSA, 2006) regarding the safety of the production strain, and consequently could not confirm the safety of the additive for the target species and consumers. In the current submission, the applicant provided supplementary information that allowed the Panel to conclude on the identity of the production strain, redefine the specifications of the additive, and finally to conclude on its safety. Therefore, the new data provided permit to conclude that Amaferm® complies with the conditions of the authorisation. However, the Panel noted that there is the need to change the specification and description of the cellulase and amylase units in the authorisation act. The data provided in the previous (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2020) and the current assessments support that Amaferm® remains safe under the approved conditions for target species, consumers and the environment. The additive is non-irritant to skin and eyes, or a dermal sensitiser but should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser.SIThe Panel wishes to thank the following for the support provided to this scientific output (in alphabetical order of the last name): Working Group on Animal Nutrition and Working Group on Microbiology, Rosella Brozzi, Christina Cuomo and Jordi Tarres Call

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of lactic acid produced by Weizmannia coagulans (synonym Bacillus coagulans) DSM 32789 for all animal species except for fish (Jungbunzlauer SA)

©2022EuropeanFoodSafetyAuthority.EFSAJournalpublishedbyWiley-VCHGmbHonbehalfofEuropeanFoodSafetyAuthority.[EN] Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of lactic acid produced by a non-genetically modified strain of Weizmannia coagulans (synonym of Bacillus coagulans) (DSM 32789) for all animal species except for fish. The production strain qualifies for the QPS approach for safety assessment. Although uncertainty remains concerning the possible presence of viable cells and/or spores of the production strain in the final product, this does not raise safety concerns for the target species, humans and the environment. The lactic acid is safe at 50,000 mg/kg complete feed for functional ruminants and pigs and at 20,000 mg/kg feed for all the other animal species and categories except for pre-ruminants for which a safe level cannot be established. The corresponding safe levels in water for drinking would be 15,000 mg/L water for pigs and 8,000 mg/L for other non-ruminant species. Although no safe concentration of lactic acid in water for drinking for ruminants can be derived, the Panel considers that the use in water for drinking is safe in ruminants when the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. The use of the additive under assessment in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumers and for the environment. It is considered corrosive to the skin, eyes and mucous membranes. Lactic acid is used in food as a preservative. It is reasonable to expect that the effect seen in food will be observed in feed when it is used at comparable concentrations and conditions. However, the FEEDAP Panel has reservations about its effectiveness as a preservative in complete feed with a moisture content of ≤ 12%.SIThe Panel wishes to acknowledge the contribution to this opinion of Martina Reitano, Joana Revez, the experts of the Microbiology and of the Animal Nutrition Working Groups of the FEEDAP Panel

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of l‐valine produced by Corynebacterium glutamicum CGMCC 7.366 for all animal species (Ningxia Eppen Biotech Co., Ltd.)

[EN] Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of l-valine produced by fermentation using a non-genetically modified strain of Corynebacterium glutamicum (CGMCC 7.366). The additive is intended to be used in feed and water for drinking for all animal species and categories. The production strain is considered suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that l-valine produced using C. glutamicum CGMCC 7.366 is safe for the target species when supplemented in appropriate amounts to the diet according to the nutritional needs of the target species. The FEEDAP Panel has concerns on the use of amino acids in water for drinking for hygienic reasons, and due to the risk of imbalances when administered simultaneously via feed. The use of l-valine produced using C. glutamicum CGMCC 7.366 in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumer and for the environment. No conclusion could be drawn on the potential of l-valine produced using C. glutamicum CGMCC 7.366 to be toxic by inhalation, irritant to the skin or eyes, or a dermal sensitiser due to the lack of data. The additive l-valine produced by fermentation using C. glutamicum CGMCC 7.366 is regarded as an efficacious source of the essential amino acid l-valine for non-ruminant nutrition. For the supplemental l-valine to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminant species, it requires protection against degradation in the rumenSIThe Panel wishes to acknowledge the contribution of Jaume Galobart, Yolanda Garc ıa Cazorla and Lucilla Gregoretti to this opinio

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of endo‐1,4‐β‐d‐mannanase produced by Thermothelomyces thermophilus DSM 33149 (Natupulse® TS/TS L) for chickens and turkeys for fattening, minor poultry species for fattening and ornamental birds (BASF SE)

Free PMC article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9972018/Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of endo-1,4-β-d-mannanase produced by Thermothelomyces thermophilus DSM 33149 (Natupulse® TS/TS L) as a zootechnical feed additive for chickens and turkeys for fattening, minor poultry species for fattening and ornamental birds. The additive under assessment, Natupulse® TS/TS L, does not pose any safety concern regarding the production strain. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is tolerated by chickens for fattening, and this conclusion can be extrapolated to all poultry for fattening. Due to the lack of reliable data regarding the potential of the additive to induce chromosomal damage, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of the additive for the target species and on the safety for consumer. The use of the additive in animal nutrition is considered safe for the environment. The additive is considered not to be irritant to the skin and eyes but is considered a respiratory sensitiser, although exposure by inhalation is unlikely. The Panel could not conclude on the potential of the additive to be a skin sensitiser. Due to the lack of reliable data, the FEEDAP Panel considered that a potential of the additive to induce chromosomal damage in exposed unprotected users cannot be excluded. Consequently, exposure of users should be minimised. The Panel concluded that the additive Natupulse® TS/TS L has the potential to be efficacious in chickens for fattening at the proposed conditions of use and this conclusion can be extrapolated to turkeys for fattening, minor poultry species for fattening and ornamental birds.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of endo‐1,4‐β‐xylanase (ECONASE® XT) produced by Trichoderma reesei CBS 140027 as a feed additive for piglets (weaned), pigs for fattening, chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying, laying hens, turkeys for fattening, turkeys reared for breeding and minor poultry species (Roal Oy)

[EN] Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of ECONASE® XT (endo-1,4-β-xylanase) produced by a genetically modified strain of Trichoderma reesei (CBS 140027) as a zootechnical feed additive for piglets (weaned), pigs for fattening, chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying, laying hens, turkeys for fattening, turkeys reared for breeding and minor poultry species. The recipient strain and the production strain T. reesei CBS 140027 are considered safe. The additive is safe for chickens for fattening and weaned piglets at the maximum recommended doses (16,000 and 24,000 BXU/kg feed, respectively) with a wide margin of safety (100-fold and 50-fold, respectively). These conclusions are extended to chickens reared for laying and to pigs for fattening at 16,000 and 24,000 BXU/kg feed, respectively. The additive is safe for turkeys for fattening or reared for breeding at 16,000 BXU/kg feed. The FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of the additive for laying hens and for minor poultry species for laying at the proposed conditions of use. The information provided does not allow to conclude on the safety of the use of ECONASE XT® P/L produced by T. reesei CBS 140027 in animal nutrition for the consumers. The use of the additive under assessment in animal nutrition does not raise safety concerns for the environment. ECONASE® XT L is non-irritant to the skin or to the eyes. In absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of the solid product to be irritant to skin and eyes and on the potential of the additive in all forms to be a dermal sensitiser. All forms of the additive should be considered as respiratory sensitisers. All forms of the additive are considered efficacious at the minimum recommended levels for the target speciesSIThe Panel wishes to thank the following for the support provided to this scientific output (in alphabetical order of the last name): Konstantinos Sofianidi

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of endo‐1,4‐beta‐xylanase (produced by Aspergillus oryzae DSM 33700) (RONOZYME® WX (CT/L)) for all poultry species and all Suidae (DSM nutritional products ltd)

Free PMC article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10585426/The additive RONOZYME® WX (CT/L) contains endo-1,4-beta-xylanase produced with a genetically modified strain of the filamentous fungus Aspergillus oryzae; the additive is currently authorised for poultry for fattening, weaned piglets, pigs for fattening, lactating sows and laying hens. The applicant has requested to change the production strain, substituting strain A. oryzae DSM 26372 with A. oryzae DSM 33700, and to extend the use of the additive to all poultry species and all Suidae. RONOZYME® WX (CT/L), manufactured with the production strain A. oryzae DSM 33700, did not give rise to safety concerns with regard to the genetic modification of the production strain. No viable cells of the production strain nor its DNA were detected in an intermediate product representative of both final formulations of the additive. RONOZYME® WX (CT/L) was considered safe for all poultry species and all Suidae at the recommended inclusion levels. The use of RONOZYME® WX CT and L manufactured with the production strain A. oryzae DSM 33700 raised no concerns for consumers. RONOZYME® WX L is not an eye irritant; however, no conclusions could be drawn on the potential of RONOZYME® WX CT to be an eye irritant. Both formulations are not irritant to the skin, but due to the lack of data, the FEEDAP Panel was not able to conclude on the potential of both formulations of the additive to be skin sensitisers. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substance, the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The additive manufactured by A. oryzae DSM 33700 raises no safety concerns for the environment. The additive has the potential to be efficacious in all poultry species and all Suidae at 100 and 200 FXU/kg complete feed, respectively.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of protease produced by Bacillus licheniformis DSM 33099 (ProAct 360) for use in poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding (DSM Nutritional Products Ltd)

Free PMC article:Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a protease (ProAct 360) produced by a genetically modified strain of Bacillus licheniformis (DSM 33099) as a zootechnical feed additive for poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding. The production strain and its recombinant DNA were not detected in an intermediate concentrated product representative of the final formulation. The final product did not trigger a safety concern with regard to the genetic modification. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that ProAct 360 is considered safe for all growing poultry species at the recommended inclusion level of 30,000 NFP/kg complete feed. The use ProAct 360 as a feed additive did not give rise to concerns for the consumers or the environment. The additive is not an eye or a dermal irritant but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. In the absence of data, no conclusions could be reached on the skin sensitisation potential of the additive. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious at 30,000 NFP/kg complete feed for all poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio