A strategic design approach to develop sustainable product service systems: examples taken from the ‘environmentally friendly innovation’ Italian prize

The product service systems’ (PSS) sustainability potential is described in the framework of the new types of stakeholder relationships and/or partnerships, producing new convergence of economic interests, and a potential concomitant systemic resources optimization.In this perspective, it is argued that the design competencies should move towards those of the ‘strategic design’, thus introducing the concept of ‘strategic design for sustainability’: the design of an innovation strategy, shifting the business focus from designing (and selling) physical products only, to designing (and selling) a system of products and services which are jointly capable of fulfilling specific client demands, while re-orienting current unsustainable trends in production and consumption practices.Some examples of PSS are presented and discussed using the PSS categories ‘services providing added value to the product life cycle’, ‘services providing final results to customers’, and ‘services providing enabling platforms for customers’. The cases derive from an analysis of the ‘environmental friendly innovation’ yearly endowed prize submissions. The Politecnico di Milano University together with the Bocconi University and Legambiente (an environmental NGO) promotes the initiative in Italy.     

Factors associated with multiple-pass procedures during chorionic villus sampling: A video analysis

Multiple placental passes during chorionic villus sampling (CVS) increase the risk of fetal loss; however, specific factors that predispose to repeat aspiration have not been delineated. To identify anatomic and technical variables associated with multiple-pass procedures, a detailed review of 205 videotaped CVS procedures (single pass = 163; multiple pass = 42) was performed, blinded to pregnancy outcome. The route of sampling did not influence the need for multiple aspiration attempts (transabdominal—30/ 135; transcervical—12/70), nor was placental location alone discriminatory. However, the combination of a posterior placenta and uterine retroversion was observed more frequently in the multiple-pass cohort (8/42 vs. 9/163; p<0.05). In transabdominal cases, suboptimal needle placement (e.g., perpendicular to the placental long axis) was more common in the initial aspiration of a multiple-pass procedure (21/30 vs. 38/105;p<0.01), while limited penetration of the catheter tip (e.g., just inside the placental edge) characterized a majority of multiple-pass cases in the transcervical subset (7/12 vs. 3/58; p<0.0001). A case-control cohort was constructed to evaluate the impact of these technical variables on sampling efficacy, independent of the influence of uterine position and placental site. In that analysis, suboptimal location and/or orientation of the sampling device remained characteristic of multiple-pass cases. We conclude that further reduction in the frequency of multiple-pass procedures might be achieved by consistent placement of the device tip in the central placental mass. Unlike amniocentesis, where any point of amnion entry will suffice, this technical nuance should be emphasized with CVS to maximize the single-pass success rate.