Search

The major challenge facing human society in the 21st century is represented by the environmental crisis. In this context, the present article proposes a sustainable vector model for managing the environmental crisis. It focuses on social, economic, and ecological aspects, with the aim of providing a framework for analysis and adapted solutions. By integrating environmental factors into decision-making processes and public policies, this model aims to improve the quality of life and promote sustainable development. This study presents a comprehensive and cohesive framework for addressing environmental challenges by integrating the Context Triangle and Phenomenon Triangle to develop a sustainable vector model. This novel approach to crisis management aims to provide a holistic and adaptive response to the complex and evolving needs of society and the environment, acknowledging the interconnected nature of environmental issues. The proposed sustainable vector model seeks to understand the trade-offs and synergies between various dimensions of sustainability, ultimately facilitating the development and implementation of more robust and equitable strategies. By incorporating this vector-based approach, the integrated framework can be employed to examine the intricate relationships between different aspects of environmental challenges, fostering a deeper understanding of their interconnected nature and promoting more effective interventions. Moreover, potential advancements may involve fractalizing the integrated framework on multiple levels, allowing for a more elaborate and comprehensive sustainable management approach. By extending the system into a multi-level fractal structure, stakeholders can investigate the relationships between different aspects of environmental challenges, ultimately driving the development of innovative and adaptive strategies that can better address the ever-changing needs of our planet and its inhabitants.

Introduction: Treat-to-target strategies are used in several chronic diseases to improve outcomes. Treatment goals have also been suggested for psoriasis, but there is currently no consensus on targets, and guidance is needed to implement this strategy in clinical practice. The project ‘Treat to Target Italia’ was launched by a scientific board (SB) of 10 psoriasis experts to generate expert consensus recommendations. Methods: On the basis of the published literature, their clinical experience, and the results of a survey among Italian dermatologists, the SB identified four relevant topics: (1) clinical remission; (2) quality of life; (3) abrogation of systemic inflammation; (4) safety. They drafted 20 statements addressing these four topics and submitted them to a panel of 28 dermatologists, in a Delphi process, to achieve consensus (greater than 80% agreement). Results: Consensus was reached on all statements. Treatment goals defining clinical remission should include a 90% improvement from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI90 response) or an absolute PASI score of less than or equal to 3. Patient’s quality of life and satisfaction are important targets. If PASI targets are achieved, there should be no or very low impact of psoriasis on quality of life [Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score less than or equal to 3]. If PASI or DLQI goals are not achieved within 3–4months, treatment should be changed. Abrogation of systemic inflammation may be crucial for preventing or delaying inflammatory comorbidities. Safety is an equally important target as efficacy. Conclusion: These 20 consensus statements define the parameters of a treat-to-target strategy for psoriasis in Italy. It is hoped that use of these in the management of patients with psoriasis will improve treatment outcomes and patient health-related quality of life.

Cyclosporine (CsA) is an effective and safe therapeutic option in various dermatoses in both adults and children. Over the last 25 years, Italian dermatologists have gained relevant experience about the use of CsA in the treatment of psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, and an Italian Consensus Conference has recently provided recommendations in adult patients. A comparison between these real-world indications and current European guidelines is hereby provided.