Resilience Assessment of Urban Communities

The multiple uncertainties of both natural and man-made disasters have prompted increased attention in the topic of resilience engineering. In this paper, an indicator-based method for measuring urban community resilience is proposed. The method is based on the PEOPLES framework, which is a hierarchical framework for defining disaster resilience of communities at various scales. It consists of seven dimensions summarized with the acronym PEOPLES: Population; Environment; Organized governmental services; Physical infrastructures; Lifestyle; Economic; and Social capital. Each of the dimensions is split into several components and indicators, which have been derived by the authors or collected from a wide range of literature. Each indicator is represented using a performance function, which portrays the functionality of the indicator in time. Higher functionality of the indicator leads to higher resilience of the community. These functions can be constructed in a systematic manner using damage and restoration parameters. The aggregation of the performance functions, passing through the different hierarchical levels of PEOPLES framework, leads to one function that represents the dynamic performance of the analysed community. This paper also introduces a matrix-based interdependency technique that serves as a weighting scheme for the different indicators. As a case study, the proposed methodology is applied to the city of San Francisco for which a resilience curve and a resilience metric have been computed

Resilience of critical structures, infrastructure, and communities

In recent years, the concept of resilience has been introduced to the field of engineering as it relates to disaster mitigation and management. However, the built environment is only one element that supports community functionality. Maintaining community functionality during and after a disaster, defined as resilience, is influenced by multiple components. This report summarizes the research activities of the first two years of an ongoing collaboration between the Politecnico di Torino and the University of California, Berkeley, in the field of disaster resilience. Chapter 1 focuses on the economic dimension of disaster resilience with an application to the San Francisco Bay Area; Chapter 2 analyzes the option of using base-isolation systems to improve the resilience of hospitals and school buildings; Chapter 3 investigates the possibility to adopt discrete event simulation models and a meta-model to measure the resilience of the emergency department of a hospital; Chapter 4 applies the meta-model developed in Chapter 3 to the hospital network in the San Francisco Bay Area, showing the potential of the model for design purposes Chapter 5 uses a questionnaire combined with factorial analysis to evaluate the resilience of a hospital; Chapter 6 applies the concept of agent-based models to analyze the performance of socio-technical networks during an emergency. Two applications are shown: a museum and a train station; Chapter 7 defines restoration fragility functions as tools to measure uncertainties in the restoration process; and Chapter 8 focuses on modeling infrastructure interdependencies using temporal networks at different spatial scales

Deterministic and fuzzy-based methods to evaluate community resilience

Community resilience is becoming a growing concern for authorities and decision makers. This paper introduces two indicator-based methods to evaluate the resilience of communities based on the PEOPLES framework. PEOPLES is a multi-layered framework that defines community resilience using seven dimensions. Each of the dimensions is described through a set of resilience indicators collected from literature and they are linked to a measure allowing the analytical computation of the indicator’s performance. The first method proposed in this paper requires data on previous disasters as an input and returns as output a performance function for each indicator and a performance function for the whole community. The second method exploits a knowledge-based fuzzy modeling for its implementation. This method allows a quantitative evaluation of the PEOPLES indicators using descriptive knowledge rather than deterministic data including the uncertainty involved in the analysis. The output of the fuzzy-based method is a resilience index for each indicator as well as a resilience index for the community. The paper also introduces an open source online tool in which the first method is implemented. A case study illustrating the application of the first method and the usage of the tool is also provided in the paper

Real-world experience of nintedanib for progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease in the UK

Background Nintedanib slows progression of lung function decline in patients with progressive fibrosing (PF) interstitial lung disease (ILD) and was recommended for this indication within the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service in Scotland in June 2021 and in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in November 2021. To date, there has been no national evaluation of the use of nintedanib for PF-ILD in a real-world setting.Methods 26 UK centres were invited to take part in a national service evaluation between 17 November 2021 and 30 September 2022. Summary data regarding underlying diagnosis, pulmonary function tests, diagnostic criteria, radiological appearance, concurrent immunosuppressive therapy and drug tolerability were collected via electronic survey.Results 24 UK prescribing centres responded to the service evaluation invitation. Between 17 November 2021 and 30 September 2022, 1120 patients received a multidisciplinary team recommendation to commence nintedanib for PF-ILD. The most common underlying diagnoses were hypersensitivity pneumonitis (298 out of 1120, 26.6%), connective tissue disease associated ILD (197 out of 1120, 17.6%), rheumatoid arthritis associated ILD (180 out of 1120, 16.0%), idiopathic nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (125 out of 1120, 11.1%) and unclassifiable ILD (100 out of 1120, 8.9%). Of these, 54.4% (609 out of 1120) were receiving concomitant corticosteroids, 355 (31.7%) out of 1120 were receiving concomitant mycophenolate mofetil and 340 (30.3%) out of 1120 were receiving another immunosuppressive/modulatory therapy. Radiological progression of ILD combined with worsening respiratory symptoms was the most common reason for the diagnosis of PF-ILD.Conclusion We have demonstrated the use of nintedanib for the treatment of PF-ILD across a broad range of underlying conditions. Nintedanib is frequently co-prescribed alongside immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapy. The use of nintedanib for the treatment of PF-ILD has demonstrated acceptable tolerability in a real-world setting

Genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in a UK university identifies dynamics of transmission

AbstractUnderstanding SARS-CoV-2 transmission in higher education settings is important to limit spread between students, and into at-risk populations. In this study, we sequenced 482 SARS-CoV-2 isolates from the University of Cambridge from 5 October to 6 December 2020. We perform a detailed phylogenetic comparison with 972 isolates from the surrounding community, complemented with epidemiological and contact tracing data, to determine transmission dynamics. We observe limited viral introductions into the university; the majority of student cases were linked to a single genetic cluster, likely following social gatherings at a venue outside the university. We identify considerable onward transmission associated with student accommodation and courses; this was effectively contained using local infection control measures and following a national lockdown. Transmission clusters were largely segregated within the university or the community. Our study highlights key determinants of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and effective interventions in a higher education setting that will inform public health policy during pandemics.</jats:p

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication