Rhodococcus Fascians: A Rare Cause of Meningitis in Humans
Rhodococcus fascians, a gram-positive bacillus, is a rare pathogen known to cause meningitis, especially in immunocompromised individuals. This case study details a 76-year-old male presenting with altered mental status and other neurological symptoms, eventually diagnosed with a ruptured pseudoaneurysm and hemodynamic instability. Despite initial confusion in diagnosis, timely intervention and surgical repair led to improvements in the patient's condition. The case underscores the importance of considering unusual pathogens in atypical clinical presentations.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Regional Expert Advisory Working Group on AKIS Regional Expert Advisory Working Group on AKIS Second Interim Meeting Second Interim Meeting From National Roadmaps to National AKIS Action Plans and regional priorities Charalambos Kasimis Professor Emeritus Agricultural University of Athens
Set out targets of the project After a few months in the project, I would say that the key key targets targets of it have been reset: First target is the setting governments, research institutions and the private sector to establish a functional AKIS structure that would facilitate the dissemination of knowledge, innovation and technology as an in-between mechanism acting top-down and bottom-up. Second, the targeted preparation of two preconditions connected with the designation of national national Roadmap Roadmap strategic strategic documents documents and of national the specified strategic objectives. Third, the development and application of regional regional and/or aiming at fostering knowledge and innovation transfer in defined topic areas. Fourth, the development of one education and communication measure for scaling up technical innovations and innovative business models with special target groups of young, dynamic farmers and agri-businesses. setting up up of of a a network network bringing together farmers, representatives of national Action Action Plans Plans for the implementation of and/or sectoral sectoral or or thematic thematic AKIS AKIS Plans Plans
From Roadmaps to Action Plans The AKIS roadmap and the action plan have a lot of similarities but are basically different in their functional implementation. The Roadmap is more of a strategy communication document and requests less specified information, whereas the Action Plan is a detailed set of actions to reach specific objectives. Roadmap 1. Strategic/High level Action Plan 1. Specific/Granular 2. Designed to show the link between the various variables and facets and their impact on the strategy completion 2. Broken down to allocation of tasks for the facilitation of assignment of responsibilities and progress tracking 3. Helps to overview the strategy implementation 3. Helps the detailed overviewing of Plan execution
The end-goal of our Action Plan, project outline, has been the developing of national and regional AKIS action plan expected to finally lead to the choosing of a specific theme for focused interventions, based on the prioritization of the importance and feasibility of these interventions. Action Plan, set in the early presentations of the
For the design of the Action Plan we: 1. specified goals and objectives 2. listed required action steps to reach objectives 3. set Milestones, Deliverables and Deadlines 4. identified the necessary human and financial resources (defining roles and responsibilities)
5. identified task dependencies, prioritized tasks using evaluation criteria of action impact and feasibility with the guideline to: a) Evaluate the listed actions according to the following criteria: Impact Impact how crucial that action is in developing a functional and integrated AKIS system (scale 1 7, 1 least impact) Feasibility Feasibility how feasible that action is in terms of resources needed (financial, human, time etc.) (scale 1 7, 1 least feasible) b) Add the two values to calculate the total value for each action c) Rank the actions according to the descending order of their values 6. designed an Action Plan template to have organised the specific objectives, action steps, tasks, assignments and deadlines
Action Plan template guideline Specified objectives Required action Milestones Deliverables Resources needed Deadline Impact (1-7, 1 least impact) Feasibility (1-7, 1 least feasible) We identify and prioritize the required action steps that must be executed to produce the deliverables. Human and financial resources needed to be assigned. We translate the strategic objectives of the Roadmap to specific objectives and actions. Specific tangible results planned to be delivered from the Action plan within a set timeframe. We set Milestones to help track achievements within the Action plan. See slide 10 (no 5) of CK Novi Sad presentation 2 See slide 10 (no 5) of CK Novi Sad presentation 2 Sets the time frame of action steps and tracking progress and achievement. They facilitate the evaluation of the impact of resource allocation for achieving the Plan s objectives. Deliverables facilitate Action Plan progress measuring. Milestones facilitate Action Plan progress measuring. Indicate the possibility and add the objectives of a regional thematic AKIS Plan (see slide 11 of this presentation)
Action Plans and regional priorities: Common priorities 1 Most Action Plans submitted are in correspondence with the Roadmaps, translating the strategic objectives to specified objectives for action. In a broad sense, Action Plans submitted are not distanced in description from other European cases presented and discussed in a SCAR-AKIS meeting in the Netherlands recently. Different prioritizations in the strategic objectives and their specification in the various countries/territories are well set and considered important for the operationalization of their Action Plans. The formalization of AKIS and of advisory services has been defined by most as Action Plan priority expected to be embedded in AKIS. Private advisory services are considered as a necessary complementary service that needs to be formalized and integrated in the system. Training, accreditation and impartiality of advisors is considered conditio sine qua non. IPARD s measure of Advisory services is considered as supplementary and supportive to the system; an increase in funding is requested.
Common priorities 2 Capacity building of all AKIS stakeholders and enhancement of R&D and RITT, in particular, seem to attract the attention in most reports. However, RITT seems, at times, to take priority over AKIS in the Action Plan argumentation for enhancement. The introduction of new structures within AKIS crosscuts all reports. Proposed structures are differentiated on the basis of each country s needs but feasibility for their realisation needs to be further examined. The Coordination body is considered the most critical. Its role and functionality need further elaboration. Awareness raising for AKIS is a common requested action. Various ways of awareness raising have been proposed but need to be adjusted to the particular environment of each case. Digitalization is expected to lead to the enhancement of advisory services and AKIS.
Other observations Too many expectations are placed on the finalization of 3S for the support to AKIS functionalization. In some cases either Roadmaps or Action Plans are not supported by elaboration/explanatory notes. Often milestones are long-listed and very detailed loosing targeting. With the exception of one report, the rest lack reference to any regional/thematic AKIS possibilities. One case proposed refers to a cross- country regional integration of AKIS for climate action and the Green Agenda and the other on sectoral AKIS for dairy and wine. There is need to lower maximalist expectations and take into consideration the realistic possibilities of each country/territory to achieve specific objectives in the timeline set. Consultation with connected public, private and other stakeholders will shape the feasible Action Plan possible in terms of objectives and operationalization.
Beyond the National level of Action Plan Intervention Development of a Draft Regional AKIS Action Plan with reference to possible cross- country AKIS links (existing and functioning, existing but needing strengthening, non- existing that need developing) should set the regional priorities, as requested in the Workplan. Local Construction of micro AKIS/local micro system Role and space of Local Action Groups (LAGS) and/or local government involvement Sectoral (wine, dairy, etc) Thematic (green-clean technology, food quality and safety, organic farming, regional cooperation etc)
Tools/structures/measures for focused AKIS interventions Operational Groups (practical, scientific, technical, organizational knowledge built into focused solutions in an interactive way) Innovation brokers/farm advisors for interactive innovation and technology transfer Interactive innovation encouraged through funding of OGs, knowledge centres, EIP projects and networks. One-stop shops for innovation and technology transfer Innovation support services
The establishment of Agri-food Centres of Innovation and Entrepreneurship involving University/Research Institutions, Regional authorities, Farm organizations and the private sector. Elsewhere is called AKIS centre, mapping the existing needs and future needs involving the Advisory Services and other RITT structures. IPARD measures Cooperation for Innovation and Knowledge Transfer Advisory services Team task: identify the level of intervention and outline the AKIS Action Plan objectives for implementation (regional-local/ sectoral/or thematic) Expected outcome: to identify and decide, by the end of November 2022, the theme and the level of intervention (regional- thematic), outlining the AKIS Action Plan to be implemented
