Risk management of integrated structures in the hotel and restaurant business

Globalization and integration processes is a feature of modern business. Effectiveness and efficiency of modern enterprise management is defined as both a competitive advantage and the ability to work with business partners. Require further study on integrated risk management structures in the hospitality industry, taking into account the interaction of participants of the formation. It is proved that the specific risk management integrated business structures is the need for a mechanism integrated risk management, taking into account the behavioral aspects of risk management: risk tolerance index and index of risk aversion partner. The purpose of the article is a generalization and improvement of theoretical and methodological principles of integrated risk management structures in hotel and restaurant business. The article uses general scientific methods and techniques of knowledge: the scientific method of information retrieval, monographic method (in essence a synthesis of concepts such as "risk management," "integrated business structure"); system analysis method (in determining the components of risk management mechanism integrated business structures). It is determined that the main components of the mechanism of integrated risk management at the enterprise hotel and restaurant business are: object-subject component (participants integrated business structure – (customers, suppliers resources, science and education, government, brokers, manufacturers and services); integration organizational component, network connections; the interests of business partners (joint, different interests); coordination of interests; portfolio risk areas of organizational risk exposure); functional and productive component: principles, methods, components, tools, functions, the result of an integrated risk management. The article is proved that the synergistic effect of risk management based interactions through: economies of scale of activity; obtaining complementary resources; reduce competition; improve the quality of management; Information effect; innovative effect; diversification of risks

Stages and technology in developing a strategic partnership

The article is devoted to analysis of interests that stimulate a private partner to joint activity with the state and advantages they obtain from realization of projects. The article identifies potential and basic advantages of the use of the form of the partnership, such as co-development/marketing, joint distribution, franchises, equity participation, joint ventures when realizing some projects

Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. Interpretation: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

РезульТаТ впровадженнЯ сИстемИ ресурсозбереженнЯ В АПК

The object of research is the result of the introduction of resource saving in the agro-industrial complex (AIC), in particular in the first area – machine building for agriculture. One of the most problematic places is the systematic implementation of resource-saving in the agro-industrial complex. To overcome this problem, the authors propose a scheme for selecting a resource-saving project for the maintenance of the agro-industrial complex in order to assess the effectiveness of resource-saving technologies.The aim of the authors is analyze the effectiveness of implementing resource-saving measures in the complex of the first sphere of the agro-industrial complex. To detail the aim, a task was set to approbate a scheme for selecting a resource-saving project for the maintenance of the agro-industrial complex for analyzing resource efficiency in enterprises, and determining the effectiveness of resource-saving measures. As a result, the multi-criteria rationale for increasing the resource efficiency of agribusiness enterprises is assessed as such, which is adequate for assessing the efficiency of production and the level of resource saving.The technology of fuel-air mixture optimization, optimally depleted fuel-air mixture with an excess air factor a≥1.1–1.15 ensures the operation of the gasoline engine with the minimum content of harmful components in the exhaust gases. In particular, the NOx concentration is significantly lower than when the mixture is mixed with a stoichiometric mixture.The economic efficiency of the resource-saving technology of the sowing device with the reserve dosing device is calculated. The average annual increase in profit from the introduction of a modernized precision seeding machine for the main tilled crops (corn, sunflower, soybeans, beets) is 1216.45 c. u. on sowing one hectare. The total annual income for a seed drill for the year is 956 thousand c.u. On the example of sowing one of the crops, maize yields the greatest economic effect – 1600,000 in a year, the smallest – sunflower (266 thousand c. u.). At the same time, the best prototype shows itself when soybean was sown, reducing losses by 99 % in value terms

Mating Performance and Singlehood Across 14 Nations

Adult individuals frequently face difficulties in attracting and keeping mates, which is an important driver of singlehood. In the current research, we investigated the mating performance (i.e., how well people do in attracting and retaining intimate partners) and singlehood status in 14 different countries, namely Austria, Brazil, China, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Peru, Poland, Russia, Spain, Turkey, the UK, and Ukraine (N = 7,181). We found that poor mating performance was in high occurrence, with about one in four participants scoring low in this dimension, and more than 57% facing difficulties in starting and/or keeping a relationship. Men and women did not differ in their mating performance scores, but there was a small yet significant effect of age, with older participants indicating higher mating performance. Moreover, nearly 13% of the participants indicated that they were involuntarily single, which accounted for about one-third of the singles in the sample. In addition, more than 15% of the participants indicated that they were voluntarily single, and 10% were between-relationships single. We also found that poor mating performance was associated with an increased likelihood of voluntary, involuntary, and between-relationships singlehood. All types of singlehood were in higher occurrence in younger participants. Although there was some cross-cultural variation, the results were generally consistent across samples

Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. Interpretation: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

Lipid profile in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 depending on the outcome of its acute phase: data from the international registry "Dynamics analysis of comorbidities in SARS-CoV-2 infection survivors"

Aim. To study the lipid profile in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) depending on the outcome of its acute phase according to the AKTIV international registry.Material and methods. The AKTIV registry included men and women over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of COVID-19, who were treated in a hospital. A total of 9364 patients were included in the registry, of which 623 patients were analyzed for levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglycerides on days 1-2 of hospitalization. The level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) was calculated using the Friedewald equation.Results. We found that a decrease in LDL-C level was significantly associated with an unfavorable prognosis for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This pattern persisted in both univariate and multivariate analyses. LDL-C levels in the final multivariate model had a significant relationship with the prognosis (an increase in the death risk by 1,7 times with a decrease per 1 mmol/l). In addition, we found that the survival of patients with an indicator level of <2,45 mmol/l is significantly worse than in patients with an LDL-C level ≥2,45 mmol/l. All patients with high LDL-C ((≥4,9 mmol/l) survived, while among patients with low LDL-C (<2,45 mmol/l. All patients with high LDL-C ((≥4,9 mmol/l) survived, while among patients with low LDL-C (<1,4 mmol/l), mortality was 13,04%, which was significantly higher than in patients with LDL-C ≥1,4 mmol/l (6,32%, p=0,047).Conclusion. A decrease in LDL-C in the acute period is significantly associated with an unfavorable prognosis for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Determination of LDL-C can be included in the examination program for patients with COVID-19. However, the predictive value of this parameter requires further study in prospective clinical studies