Search

This multicenter cross-sectional study explored the responsiveness of Mental Health Services (MHS) to two years of COVID-19 emergency in Italy. Specifically, the study explored the ability of staff to: acknowledge users' capabilities and value teamwork; reinvent the service and maintain/introduce good practices; and, acknowledge the positive aspects of the pandemic experience. These aspects were investigated in relation to socio-demographic and professional variables. Professionals from 17 MHS of 15 Italian Regions completed an online questionnaire on the MHS transformation during COVID-19. Data were collected at the end of the national health emergency (March 1-April 30, 2022). Most of the 1077 participants said they: paid more attention to users' physical health; revised treatment plans; mediated between user needs and safe work procedures; revalued the importance of gestures and habits; discovered unexpected personal resources in users; and, found positive aspects in the COVID-19 experience. The multivariate analyses showed significant differences in staff opinions related to gender, workplace, professional role, and geographic area of the MHS, covarying with staff work experience. Compared to male staff, female staff perceived MHS as more flexible and capable to maintain best practices, and female staff acknowledged more capabilities to the users. Compared to central and northern Italy staff, southern Italy staff gave more values to teamwork, perceived MHS as more capable to maintain best practices and acknowledged higher positive transformations. These findings may be useful for planning community-oriented MHS in the post-pandemic period, taking into account both the experience gained by staff and the MHS process of adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on the mental health and well-being (WB) of citizens. This cross-sectional study included 4 waves of data collection aimed at identifying profiles of individuals with different levels of WB. The study included a representative stratified sample of 10,013 respondents in Italy. The WHO 5-item well-being scale (WHO-5) was used for the assessment of WB. Different supervised machine learning approaches (multinomial logistic regression, partial least-square discriminant analysis—PLS-DA—, classification tree—CT—) were applied to identify individual characteristics with different WB scores, first in waves 1–2 and, subsequently, in waves 3 and 4. Forty-one percent of participants reported "Good WB", 30% "Poor WB", and 28% "Depression". Findings carried out using multinomial logistic regression show that Resilience was the most important variable able for discriminating the WB across all waves. Through the PLS-DA, Increased Unhealthy Behaviours proved to be the more important feature in the first two waves, while Financial Situation gained most relevance in the last two. COVID-19 Perceived Risk was relevant, but less than the other variables, across all waves. Interestingly, using the CT we were able to establish a cut-off for Resilience (equal to 4.5) that discriminated good WB with a probability of 65% in wave 4. Concluding, we found that COVID-19 had negative implications for WB. Governments should support evidence-based strategies considering factors that influence WB (i.e., Resilience, Perceived Risk, Healthy Behaviours, and Financial Situation). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The unwillingness to share contacts is one of the least explored aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we report the factors associated with resistance to collaborate on contact tracing, based on the results of a nation-wide survey conducted in Italy in January-March 2021. Methods and findings: The repeated cross-sectional on-line survey was conducted among 7,513 respondents (mean age 45.7, 50.4% women) selected to represent the Italian adult population 18–70 years old. Two groups were defined based on the direct question response expressing (1) unwillingness or (2) willingness to share the names of individuals with whom respondents had contact. We selected 70% of participants (training data set) to produce several multivariable binomial generalized linear models and estimated the proportion of variation explained by the model by McFadden R2, and the model's discriminatory ability by the index of concordance. Then, we have validated the regression models using the remaining 30% of respondents (testing data set), and identified the best performing model by removing the variables based on their impact on the Akaike information criterion and then evaluating the model predictive accuracy. We also performed a sensitivity analysis using principal component analysis. Overall, 5.5% of the respondents indicated that in case of positive SARS-CoV-2 test they would not share contacts. Of note, this percentage varied from 0.8% to 46.5% depending on the answers to other survey questions. From the 139 questions included in the multivariable analysis, the initial model proposed 20 independent factors that were reduced to the 6 factors with only modest changes in the model performance. The 6-variables model demonstrated good performance in the training (c-index 0.85 and McFadden R2 criteria 0.25) and in the testing data set (93.3% accuracy, AUC 0.78, sensitivity 30.4% and specificity 97.4%). The most influential factors related to unwillingness to share contacts were the lack of intention to perform the test in case of contact with a COVID-19 positive individual (OR 5.60, 95% CI 4.14 to 7.58, in a fully adjusted multivariable analysis), disagreement that the government should be allowed to force people into self-isolation (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.84), disagreement with the national vaccination schedule (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.86 to 3.69), not following to the preventive anti-COVID measures (OR 3.23, 95% CI 1.85 to 5.59), the absence of people in the immediate social environment who have been infected with COVID-19 (1.66, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.21), as well as difficulties in finding or understanding the information about the infection or related recommendations. A limitation of this study is the under-representation of persons not participating in internet-based surveys and some vulnerable groups like homeless people, persons with disabilities or migrants. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed several groups that expressed unwillingness to collaborate on contact tracing. The identified patterns may play a principal role not only in the COVID-19 epidemic but also be important for possible future public health threats, and appropriate interventions for their correction should be developed and ready for the implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus pandemic and related social distancing measures have brought about dramatic changes in people's lives. In particular, health workers have been forced to change their activities both for the different needs of patients and for preventive measures against the spread of the virus. This study is aimed at comparing the urgent psychiatric consultations (UPC) performed at the outpatient Mental Health Center (MHC) of Modena during the coronavirus outbreak period, from 1 March to 31 August 2020, with the same period in 2019. We retrospectively collected in a database the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients who required UPC in the MHC during the 6-month observation periods in both 2019 and 2020. Data were statistically analyzed. We analyzed 656 urgent psychiatric consultations in 2019 and 811 in 2020, requested by 425 patients in 2019 and 488 in 2020, respectively. In the pandemic period, we observed an increase in the total and daily number of UPC which were more frequently required by patients in care at local outpatient services in comparison with the previous period. During 2020, an increased number of UPC was carried out remotely and the outcome was more frequently represented by discharge at home, avoiding hospitalization as much as possible. In the course of the coronavirus pandemic, MHC had to face an increased demand for clinical activity especially from the most clinically and socially vulnerable patients, who more frequently required UPC in outpatient psychiatric services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Long-Term Care Facilities (LTCF) in Italy have been particularly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in terms of mortality rates of older residents. However, it is still unclear the actual extent of this situation. The aim of this manuscript is to assess the extent of mortality rates of older adults in LTCF during the pandemic across different regions of Italy, compared to the previous years and to older general population not resident in LTCF. Methods: We extracted and analyzed data collected by three Italian institutions (i.e., Italian Statistician Institute ISTAT, Italian N.I.H, Milan Health Unit) about the number of deaths among older people living in the community and among LTCF residents during the pandemic and the previous years. We also compared the observed mortality rate among LTCF residents in each Italian Region with the corresponding expected number of deaths of the general older adult population to obtain an observed/expected ratio (O/E ratio). Results: During the pandemic, about 8.5% (N = 6,797) of Italian older adults residents in LTCF died. Findings resulting from the O/E ratio suggest that LTCF residents (in particular in the Lombardy Region) show higher mortality rates when compared to expected values of mortality rates among the older general population living in the community. Furthermore, we found that the risk of death among LTCF residents increased about 4 times during the pandemic when compared to the previous years. Conclusions: Mortality rates in LTCF were high during the pandemic, especially in Lombardy. Possible causes of higher mortality rates in LTCF and suggestions for specific targeted interventions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the current COVID-19 disease emergency, it is not only an ethical imperative but also a public health responsibility to keep the network of community psychiatry services operational, particularly for the most vulnerable subjects (those with mental illness, disability, and chronic conditions). At the same time, it is necessary to reduce the spread of the COVID-19 disease within the outpatient and inpatient services affiliated with Mental Health Departments. These instructions, first published online on 16 March 2020 in their original Italian version, provide a detailed description of actions, proposed by the Italian Society of Epidemiological Psychiatry, addressed to Italian Mental Health Departments during the current COVID-19 pandemic. The overall goal of the operational instructions is to guarantee, during the current health emergency, the provision of the best health care possible, taking into account both public health necessities and the safety of procedures. These instructions could represent a useful resource to mental health providers, and stakeholders to face the current pandemic for which most of Mental Health Departments worldwide are not prepared to. These instructions could provide guidance and offer practical tools which can enable professionals and decision makers to foresee challenges, like those already experienced in Italy, which in part can be avoided or minimised if timely planned. These strategies can be shared and adopted, with the appropriate adjustments, by Mental Health Departments in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the actual availability of COVID-19 vaccines to combat the pandemic, many people are still vacillating in their decision to vaccinate. In this study, we considered the effect of two relevant contextual issues on vaccination intention: the number of people infected with COVID-19 is increasing, and the pace of vaccination is gaining speed. Specifically, we hypothesized that having already contracted SARS-CoV-2 (post-positive reluctance) could lead people to underestimate the importance of vaccination. Moreover, as the number of vaccinated people increases, more hesitant people could fall into the free-riding intention category, benefitting from the immunity provided by others' vaccinations. Vaccine hesitancy becomes more critical as the vaccination campaign proceeds: at one point, it will be inevitable to deal with hesitant people. This study is part of a WHO Regional Office for Europe project and involved a representative sample of 5006 Italians interviewed in January-February 2021. In case of post-positive reluctance, both young age and female gender increase vaccine hesitancy, while a high level of education reduces free-riding intention. Considering post-positive reluctance and free riding, a protective effect on hesitancy is associated with negative affective states, adherence to protective behaviors, trust in health information sources, and resilience. In contrast, increased vaccine hesitancy is associated with a high level of conspiracy-mindedness and trust in media information sources. Recognizing and studying the post-positive reluctance and the phenomenon of free-riding people can help us to become more efficient in combatting the virus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]