Search

Background: The role of school contacts in the spread of the virus and the effectiveness of school closures in controlling the epidemic is still debated. We aimed to quantify the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the school setting by type of school, characteristics of the index case and calendar period in the Province of Reggio Emilia (RE), Italy. The secondary aim was to estimate the speed of implementation of contact tracing. Methods: A population-based analysis of surveillance data on all COVID-19 cases occurring in RE, Italy, from 1 September 2020, to 4 April 2021, for which a school contact and/or exposure was suspected. An indicator of the delay in contact tracing was calculated as the time elapsed since the index case was determined to be positive and the date on which the swab test for classmates was scheduled (or most were scheduled). Results: Overall, 30,184 and 13,608 contacts among classmates and teachers/staff, respectively, were identified and were recommended for testing, and 43,214 (98.7%) underwent the test. Secondary transmission occurred in about 40% of the investigated classes, and the overall secondary case attack rate was 4%. This rate was slightly higher when the index case was a teacher but with almost no differences by type of school, and was stable during the study period. Speed of implementation of contact tracing increased during the study period, with the time from index case identification to testing of contacts being reduced from seven to three days. The ability to identify the possible source of infection in the index case also increased. Conclusions: Despite the spread of the Alpha variant during the study period in RE, the secondary case attack rate remained stable from school reopening in September 2020 until the beginning of April 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a population-based prospective cohort study on archive data describing the age- and sex-specific prevalence of COVID-19 and its prognostic factors. All 2653 symptomatic patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from February 27 to April 2, 2020 in the Reggio Emilia province, Italy, were included. COVID-19 cumulative incidence, hospitalization and death rates, and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated according to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Females had higher prevalence of infection than males below age 50 (2.61 vs. 1.84 ‰), but lower in older ages (16.49 vs. 20.86 ‰ over age 80). Case fatality rate reached 20.7% in cases with more than 4 weeks follow up. After adjusting for age and comorbidities, men had a higher risk of hospitalization (HR 1.4 95% CI 1.2 to 1.6) and of death (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.1). Patients over age 80 compared to age < 50 had HR 7.1 (95% CI 5.4 to 9.3) and HR 27.8 (95% CI 12.5 to 61.7) for hospitalization and death, respectively. Immigrants had a higher risk of hospitalization (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.81) than Italians and a similar risk of death. Risk of hospitalization and of death were higher in patients with heart failure, arrhythmia, dementia, coronary heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension, while COPD increased the risk of hospitalization (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.5) but not of death (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.7). Previous use of ACE inhibitors had no effect on risk of death (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.34). Identified susceptible populations and fragile patients should be considered when setting priorities in public health planning and clinical decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study aims to describe the distribution of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) by care plan and to highlight determinants of underuse and overuse of integrated care (IC). This cross-sectional study included all T2D patients resident in Reggio Emilia on 31/12/2015 based on the population-based diabetes registry. Eligibility for IC requires good glycaemic control, no rapid insulin, no kidney failure and no diabetes complications. We calculated the proportion of IC underuse and overuse and adjusted prevalence estimate using multivariate logistic regression. Determinants were age, sex, citizenship, district of residence and time since diagnosis. Of 29,776 patients, 15,364 (51.6%) were in diabetes clinic plan, 9851 (33.1%) in IC plan and 4561 (15.3%) not in any care plan (i.e., in Other group). There were 10,906 (36.6%) patients eligible for IC, of whom 1000 in Other group. When we adjusted for all covariates and restricted the analysis to patients included in care plans, the proportion of those eligible for IC plan but cared for in diabetes clinic plan (i.e. underuse of IC) was 28% (n = 3028/9906; 95%CI 27–29). Similarly, the proportion of those not eligible for IC but cared for in IC plan (i.e. overuse of IC) was 11% (n = 1720/11,896; 95%CI 10–11).The main determinant of both IC underuse and overuse was the district of residence. Foreign status was associated with underuse (37%; 95%CI 33–43), while old age (≥80 years) with both underuse (36%; 95%CI 0.33–0.38) and overuse (23%; 95%CI 22–25). The criterion for suspension of IC plan most frequently found was renal failure, followed by hospitalization for diabetes-related complications. Patients are more often allocated to more specialized settings than not. Healthcare provider-related factors are the main determinants of inappropriate setting allocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To compare the effectiveness of integrated care with that of the diabetes clinic care model in terms of mortality and hospitalisation of type 2 diabetes patients with low risk of complications. Methods: Out of 27234 people with type 2 diabetes residing in the province of Reggio Emilia on 31/12/2011, 3071 were included in this cohort study as eligible for integrated care (i.e., low risk of complications) and cared for with the same care model for at least two years. These patients were followed up from 2012 to 2016, for all-cause and diabetes-related mortality and hospital admissions. We performed a Poisson regression model, using the proportion of eligible patients included in the integrated care model for each general practitioner as an instrumental variable. Results: 1700 patients were cared for by integrated care and 1371 by diabetes clinics. Mortality rate ratios were 0.83 (95%CI 0.60–1.13) and 0.95 (95%CI 0.54–1.70) for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, respectively, and incidence rate ratios were 0.90 (95%CI 0.76–1.06) and 0.91 (95%CI 0.69–1.20) for all-cause and cardiovascular disease hospitalisation, respectively. Conclusion: For low risk patients with type 2 diabetes, the integrated care model involving both general practitioner and diabetes clinic professionals showed similar mortality and hospitalisation as a model with higher use of specialized care in an exclusively diabetes clinic setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]