Refine
Year of publication
- 2014 (43) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (13)
- Report (12)
- Study Thesis (4)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Bachelor Thesis (2)
- Book (2)
- Course Material (2)
- Working Paper (2)
- Master's Thesis (1)
- Periodical Part (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (43)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (43)
Keywords
- Flussturbine (2)
- Kindertagesstätte (2)
- Kommunikation (2)
- Korruption (2)
- Tagesbetreuung (2)
- Wasserkraft (2)
- Affektives Commitment (1)
- Alterung (1)
- Approval (1)
- Asynchronmaschine (1)
In diesem Beitrag wird die Möglichkeit dargestellt, wie Belastungsspitzen beim Betrieb von Flussturbinen in Inselnetzen durch die kinetische Energie des Wassers abgedeckt werden können. Als Beispiel dienen dabei Kühlgeräte für Lebensmittel. Flussturbinen arbeiten ohne Staustufen in der Strömung der Flüsse. Sie stellen eine Möglichkeit zur Energieversorgung von kleinen Siedlungen ohne öffentliche Stromversorgung dar. Der besondere Vorteil ist, dass sie ohne aufwändige Bauwerke zur Wasserführung auskommen.
Bei der Versorgung von Inselnetzen muss die Turbine alleine die benötigte Leistung bereitstellen. Dies gilt auch für die Abdeckung von Belastungsspitzen. In diesem Beitrag wird anhand von Beispielrechnen dargestellt, welches Potenzial die kinetische Energie des Wassers in der Turbine hat, um die Belastungsspitzen abzudecken. Die Berechnungen an Kühlgeräten zeigen, dass das Einschalten der Kühlaggregate ein kritischer Betriebspunkt beim Betrieb von Flussturbinen in Inselnetzen sein kann. Dies gilt besonders dann, wenn die stationäre Leistung bereits nahe an der verfügbaren Leistung ist.
Hier muss in recht kurzer Zeit eine große elektrische Arbeit zur Verfügung gestellt werden, die Leistung also in kurzer Zeit ansteigen und anschließend wieder abfallen. Die Abschätzung der elektrischen Arbeit, die sich aus der kinetischen Energie des Wassers in der Turbine gewinnen lässt, zeigt aber, dass durch Absenken der Fließgeschwindigkeit kurzfristig die benötigte elektrische Leistung und Arbeit bereit gestellt werden kann.
The drugs we use to treat any condition – from an innocuous cough to a life-threatening cancer – are the outcome of painstaking human clinical trials. These trials are the only way to credibly determine the safety and efficacy of drugs. In recent years there has been a clear shift in clinical trial sites from core developed countries like USA, European countries to developing countries like India, China, South American countries. This shift is related to challenges and opportunities like costs of trials, recruitment issues, and regulatory challenges in developed vs. developing countries. Developing countries and developed countries have their unique disease burden patterns based on various parameters like but not limited to age, health care facilities, health insurance, sanitary conditions, environmental issues, education, nutrition
and GDP. Previous studies have reported that many of the important global diseases are not much explored in clinical trials and many published clinical trials have very less international health relevance. This study was aimed at finding the correlation between disease burdens, number of clinical trials done and trial success rates. We compared 2005 - 2010 Global Burden of Disease data for Germany, India and number of clinical trials from clinicaltrials.gov database done in the same period. Our findings indicated that there was a good correlation between the disease burden and clinical trials for Germany in 2005 and 2010. For India in 2005 there was a moderate positive correlation, 2010 data showed the improvement in India in terms of match between disease burden and clinical trials. But careful observation of the data shows still a need for more trials on Communicable, maternal, neonatal and nutritional disorders.
Background: After kidney transplantation, immunosuppressive therapy causes impaired cellular immune defense leading to an increased risk of viral complications. Trough level monitoring of immunosuppressants is insufficient to estimate the individual intensity of immunosuppression. We have already shown that virus-specific T cells (Tvis) correlate with control of virus replication as well as with the intensity of immunosuppression. The multicentre IVIST01-trial should prove that additional steering of immunosuppressive and antiviral therapy by Tvis levels leads to better graft function by avoidance of over-immunosuppression (for example, viral infections) and drug toxicity (for example, nephrotoxicity).
Methods/design: The IVIST-trial starts 4 weeks after transplantation. Sixty-four pediatric kidney recipients are randomized either to a non-intervention group that is only treated conservatively or to an intervention group with additional monitoring by Tvis. The randomization is stratified by centre and cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis. In both groups the immunosuppressive medication (cyclosporine A and everolimus) is adopted in the same target range of trough levels. In the non-intervention group the immunosuppressive therapy (cyclosporine A and everolimus) is only steered by classical trough level monitoring and the antiviral therapy of a CMV infection is performed according to a standard protocol. In contrast, in the intervention group the dose of immunosuppressants is individually adopted according to Tvis levels as a direct measure of the intensity of immunosuppression in addition to classical trough level monitoring. In case of CMV infection or reactivation the antiviral management is based on the individual CMV-specific immune defense assessed by the CMV-Tvis level. Primary endpoint of the study is the glomerular filtration rate 2 years after transplantation; secondary endpoints are the number and severity of viral infections and the incidence of side effects of immunosuppressive and antiviral drugs.
Discussion: This IVIST01-trial will answer the question whether the new concept of steering immunosuppressive and antiviral therapy by Tvis levels leads to better future graft function. In terms of an effect-related drug monitoring, the study design aims to realize a personalization of immunosuppressive and antiviral management after transplantation. Based on the IVIST01-trial, immunomonitoring by Tvis might be incorporated into routine care after kidney transplantation.