Systematic review of articles related to wet passages or wet bridges

Abstract

The main objective of this systematic review is to analyze articles related to wet passages or wet bridges in order, with their help, to understand the purpose and benefit they bring to communities, to know the material used for their construction and finally, in function of the approaches of others authors, define what wet passages really are. With the support of quotes from Cavalcante & Cunha (2009), Bezerra, (2010) and Júnior (2023), it can be clearly defined that wet passages or wet bridges are concrete or mortared stone structures, built across rivers or streams to allow the passage of motorized or non-motorized vehicles, people and animals from one bank to another during all times of the year. The need to be used at all times of the year is due to their multi-usality. In the dry season, they facilitate the movement of vehicles against the sandbank and, in the rainy season, with little current, their normal functionality. The stone used to build wet passages or wet bridges is of granite or other origin. The methodology used to select the articles that were part of this systematic review is PRISMA, which starts with a normal Google search, but, due to the lack of many publications focused on the topic, we had to resort to Google academic, where it was possible to identify in the initial search 58 articles, of which 43 were excluded by changing the title, bringing this to 15. After this stage, 5 were excluded after reading the abstract and, after reading the full text, 3 were excluded, leaving only 7 articles that met the criteria for inclusion and analyzed in full for the present review. In the end, after the analysis was carried out objectively, of the 7 articles selected, 3 were excluded because they did not deal objectively with the topic of wet passages. Finally, with 4 articles by Bezerra, (2010), Vieira (2020), Soares Júnior; Saints; Cavalcante; Alves & Silva (2021) and Júnior (2023) the objectives were achieved. The theme is current and very relevant for the country, because according to Bezerra (2010. p. 34) and Júnior (2023. p. 2), its construction “represents a relatively small expense, compared to the cost of building a bridge [...]”. It should be noted that even though it is known that the sandbar in the beds, during the dry season, also constitutes a transitability problem, none of the authors cited in this systematic review deigned to talk about this problem. As this is a scientific limitation in light of PRISMA, it is recommended that it be discussed in future research work. In summary, it is concluded that these four authors, when the subject has to do with the theme of wet passages and according to Bezerro (2010. p. 35), constitute primary sources due to the lack of research focused on this theme. Also conclude that even if built with some piping to allow the flow of water in the lower part, practice shows that for rivers with greater currents, the wet passages are always knocked down, and it is therefore not advisable to build in this way in rivers with greater flow periodic regime.