Search

BackgroundThe World Health Organization defines “infodemic” as the phenomenon of an uncontrolled spread of information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak, causing confusion and risk-taking behaviors that can harm health. The aim of this scoping review is to examine international evidence and identify strategies and bottlenecks to tackle health-related fake news.MethodsWe performed a scoping review of the literature from 1 January 2018 to 26 January 2023 on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases. We also performed a search of grey literature on institutional websites. The research question has been defined according to the PCC (population, concept, and context) mnemonic for constructing research questions in scoping reviews.ResultsThe overall research in the scientific databases yielded a total of 5,516 records. After removing duplicates, and screening the titles, abstracts, and full texts, we included 21 articles from scientific literature. Moreover, 5 documents were retrieved from institutional websites. Based on their content, we decided to group recommendations and bottlenecks into five different and well-defined areas of intervention, which we called strategies: “foster proper communication through the collaboration between science and social media companies and users,” “institutional and regulatory interventions,” “check and debunking,” “increase health literacy,” and “surveillance and monitoring through new digital tools.”ConclusionThe multidisciplinary creation of standardized toolkits that collect recommendations from the literature and institutions can provide a valid solution to limit the infodemic, increasing the health education of both citizens and health professionals, providing the knowledge to recognize fake news, as well as supporting the creation and validation of AI tools aimed at prebunking and debunking.

Abstract Objective Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a rare and yet unexplained condition. The most frequent cause is myocardial infarction, while a small proportion is due to arrhythmogenic syndromes (e.g., channelopathies). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence and risk factors associated with SCD in workers. Material and methods A search for eligible studies was performed utilizing three databases (PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus). The inclusion criteria were fulfilled if sudden cardiac death due to channelopathy in workers was mentioned. Results Out of the 1408 articles found across three databases, 6 articles were included in the systematic review but the meta-analysis was conducted on 3 studies The total sample included was 23,450 participants. The pooled prevalence of channelopathies in employees was 0.3% (95% CI 0.07–0.43%), of sudden cardiac death in employees was 2.8% (95% CI 0.37–5.20%), and of sudden cardiac death in employees with a diagnosis of cardiac channelopathies was 0.2% (95% CI 0.02– 0.30%). Conclusions SCD is a serious and potentially preventable condition that can occur among workers. By identifying and addressing work-related risk factors, providing appropriate screening and interventions, and promoting healthy lifestyle behaviors, we can work to reduce the incidence of SCD and improve the cardiovascular health and well-being of workers.

Abstract Background The advent of Personalized Medicine (PM) holds significant promise in revolutionizing healthcare by tailoring treatments to individual patients based on their data. However, its successful implementation requires the seamless integration of innovative technologies and presents formidable challenges in terms of sustainability. To tackle these challenges head-on, the International Consortium for Personalized Medicine (ICPerMed) was established, and the IC2PerMed project, as part of this consortium, seeks to foster collaboration between the European Union (EU) and China in the field of Personalized Medicine. Based on the results collected by the project, the objective of this study is to discern the key priorities for the implementation of Personalised Medicine concerning Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and Big Data and digital solutions, with a particular emphasis on data management and protection. Methods A Delphi survey was conducted to gather expert’s consensus on the main priorities for actions on Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and Big Data and digital solutions in the field of Personalized Medicine. Results The survey identified seven priorities in the area of Big Data and digital solutions, including data interoperability, standards, security measures, and international partnerships. Additionally, twelve priorities were identified for the innovation-to-market process, emphasizing cost-effectiveness, need assessment, and value definition in resource allocation. Conclusions The effective implementation of new technologies in Personalized Medicine research and practice is essential for the advancement of healthcare systems in both the European and Chinese contexts. The identified priorities play a pivotal role in promoting the sustainability of health systems and driving innovation in the implementation of Personalized Medicine. Addressing challenges related to data interoperability, standards, security, international collaboration, cost-effectiveness, and value assessment is of utmost importance in order to propel the progress of Personalized Medicine in healthcare systems.

Summary: Background: To receive the best care, people share their health data (HD) with their health practitioners (known as sharing HD for primary purposes). However, during the past two decades, sharing for other (i.e., secondary) purposes has become of great importance in numerous fields, including public health, personalized medicine, research, and development. We aimed to conduct the first comprehensive overview of all studies that investigated people's HD sharing attitudes—along with associated barriers/motivators and significant influencing factors—for all data types and across both primary and secondary uses. Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CINAHL for relevant studies published in English between database inception and February 28, 2023, using a predefined set of keywords. Studies were included, regardless of their design, if they reported outcomes related to attitudes towards sharing HD. We extracted key data from the included studies, including the type of HD involved and findings related to: HD sharing attitudes (either in general or depending on type of data/user); barriers/motivators/benefits/concerns of the study participants; and sociodemographic and other variables that could impact HD sharing behaviour. The qualitative synthesis was conducted by dividing the studies according to the data type (resulting in five subgroups) as well as the purpose the data sharing was focused on (primary, secondary or both). The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of non-randomised studies. This work was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023413822. Findings: Of 2109 studies identified through our search, 116 were included in the qualitative synthesis, yielding a total of 228,501 participants and various types of HD represented: person-generated HD (n = 17 studies and 10,771 participants), personal HD in general (n = 69 studies and 117,054 participants), Biobank data (n = 7 studies and 27,073 participants), genomic data (n = 13 studies and 54,716 participants), and miscellaneous data (n = 10 studies and 18,887 participants). The majority of studies had a moderate level of quality (83 [71.6%] of 116 studies), but varying levels of quality were observed across the included studies. Overall, studies suggest that sharing intentions for primary purposes were observed to be high regardless of data type, and it was higher than sharing intentions for secondary purposes. Sharing for secondary purposes yielded variable findings, where both the highest and the lowest intention rates were observed in the case of studies that explored sharing biobank data (98% and 10%, respectively). Several influencing factors on sharing intentions were identified, such as the type of data recipient, data, consent. Further, concerns related to data sharing that were found to be mutual for all data types included privacy, security, and data access/control, while the perceived benefits included those related to improvements in healthcare. Findings regarding attitudes towards sharing varied significantly across sociodemographic factors and depended on data type and type of use. In most cases, these findings were derived from single studies and therefore warrant confirmations from additional studies. Interpretation: Sharing health data is a complex issue that is influenced by various factors (the type of health data, the intended use, the data recipient, among others) and these insights could be used to overcome barriers, address people's concerns, and focus on spreading awareness about the data sharing process and benefits. Funding: None.

Summary: Large seasonal outbreaks of bronchiolitis put pressure on healthcare systems and particularly on intensive care units (ICUs). ICU admission is necessary to provide respiratory support to the severest cases, otherwise bronchiolitis can result in substantial mortality. ICU resources are often insufficient and there is scant evidence to guide the ICU clinical management. Most available studies do not cover the ICU-admitted cases and do not consider the associated public health issues. We review this topic through a multidisciplinary approach from both the clinical and public health perspectives, with an analysis based on pathophysiology and cost-effectiveness. We suggest ways to optimise respiratory care, minimise ICU stay, “protect” ICU beds and, whenever possible, make them available for other critically ill children. We also provide guidance on how to prepare ICUs to work under stressful conditions due to outbreaks and to reduce the risk of nosocomial cross-contamination, particularly in ICUs caring for high-risk children. Funding: None.

Abstract Background Personalised medicine (PM) has been fostered by technological and medical advances, but all stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, citizens and policy makers, should achieve adequate health literacy to promote PM implementation. The “Integrating China in the International Consortium for Personalised Medicine” (IC2PerMed) project, funded by the International Consortium for Personalised Medicine, focuses on this issue by highlighting the need to educate healthcare professionals and empower citizens. Within the aforementioned project, building on a mapping of European and Chinese policies in PM, experts in the field of PM participated in an online workshop and a following two-round Delphi survey, in order to identify the priority areas of intervention for healthcare professionals’ education and curricula, engagement and empowerment of citizens and patients. Results Nine experts completed the survey and reached a consensus on seventeen priorities: seven were related to health professionals’ education and curricula, whereas ten on citizen and patients’ awareness and empowerment. Conclusion These priorities emphasized the importance of education and health literacy, multidisciplinary and international collaboration, public trust, and consideration of ethical, legal, and social issues. The present experience highlights the relevance of the involvement of stakeholders in informing decision-makers, developing appropriate national plans, strategies, and policies, and ensuring the adequate implementation of PM in health systems.

Abstract Introduction Personalized Medicine (PM) is one of the main priorities of the research agenda of the European Commission and the focus of the European Coordination and Support Action titled “Integrating China into the International Consortium for Personalized Medicine” (IC2PerMed). Similar to the European focus, PM is a current priority of the Chinese Government, through dedicated policies and its five-year investment plans. In the context of IC2PerMed, we implemented a survey to understand the state of the art of the implementation of PM related policies in EU and China, and to identify opportunities for future Sino-European collaborations. Methods The survey was elaborated by the IC2PerMed consortium and validated by a focus group of experts. The final version, in English and Chinese, was administered online to a pool of accurately selected experts. Participation was anonymous and voluntary. The survey consists of 19 questions in 3 sections: (1) personal information; (2) policy in PM; (3) facilitating and hindering factors for Sino-European collaboration in PM. Results Forty-seven experts completed the survey, 27 from Europe and 20 from China. Only four participants were aware of the implementation of PM-related policies in their working country. Expert reported that PM areas with greatest policy impact so far were: Big Data and digital solutions; citizen and patient literacy; and translational research. The main obstacles found were the lack of shared investment strategies and the limited application of scientific developments in clinical practice. Aligning European and Chinese efforts, finding common ground across cultural, social, and language barriers, were considered as actions needed to enhance efforts in applying PM strategies internationally. Conclusion To achieve efficiency and sustainability of health systems, it remains crucial to transform PM into an opportunity for all citizens and patients with the commitment of all the stakeholders involved. The results obtained aim to help define common research and development approaches, standards and priorities and increase collaboration at international level, as well as provide key solutions to enable convergence towards a common PM research, innovation, development and implementation approach between Europe and China.

Abstract Background Cities contribute to and are affected by the climate crisis, determining significant health issues in urban settings. Educational institutions have a privileged position to contribute to achieving the transformations needed for a healthier future, so Urban Health education is fundamental to empowering the health of the youth living in cities. This study aims to measure and raise the awareness of Urban Health among students attending a high school in Rome (Italy). Methods An interactive educational intervention, consisting of four sessions, was conducted in a Roman high school during spring 2022. Overall, 319 students aged between 13 and 18 attended the sessions and were asked to complete a 11-items questionnaire before and another after the interventions. Data was gathered anonymously and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results Fifty-eight percent of respondents improved their post-intervention questionnaire score, while 15% did not improve and 27% got worse. The mean score significantly improved after the intervention (p

Abstract Non-technical summary Healthcare systems significantly impact the environment, which in turn affects human health. To address this, we propose to revise a popular framework for healthcare improvement, by introducing the advancement of planetary health (the health of both humans and the natural systems) among the aims that health systems should pursue. This approach suggests reducing medical service needs through disease prevention, minimizing environmental impacts, and supporting global efforts to protect planetary health. Practical applications to bring about these pathways are documented in the literature. Technical summary Restoring the health of the planet, with concurrent benefits for human civilization, is paramount. Healthcare systems play a crucial role in this regard, considering the environmental impact of health services. Widely recognized approaches to designing healthcare systems for the optimization of their performance are based on the pursuit of multiple aims, such as the Triple Aim and Quadruple Aim frameworks. The objective of this work is to revise the latter by substituting ‘Advance Planetary Health’ for ‘Improve Population Health’. The objective of advancing planetary health supports all other pre-existing objectives: lowering costs, enhancing patient experience, team wellbeing, and population health, which directly relates to planetary health. Health systems promoting planetary health reduce the need for medical services through disease prevention and health promotion, pursue the provision of appropriate care, minimize the overall environmental impact of medical services, and support planetary health initiatives across all sectors and society. Multiple interconnected pathways exist to operationalize the above components. A revised quadruple aim for healthcare improvement, aligned with social and economic goals of sustainable prosperity and wellbeing, may be a desirable step toward constructing planetary health systems capable of maximizing the health of humans and natural systems. Social media summary It's time for new ‘planetary health systems’: focusing on planetary health to enhance healthcare performance. #PlanetaryHealth #ClimateCrisis #HealthcareImprovement.

Introduction Surgical site infections still remain a major public health challenge and have become an increasing universal risk, especially for the implantation of orthopaedic devices.Unfortunately, the discovery and increasingly widespread use (especially the misuse) of antibiotics have led to the rapid appearance of antibiotic-resistant strains today; more and more infections are caused by microorganisms that fail to respond to conventional treatments.Oxygen-ozone therapy has been extensively used and studied for decades across various potential medical applications and has provided consistent effects with minimal side effects.This study aims to determine the superiority of oxygen-ozone therapy in combination with oral antibiotic therapy in patients with wound infections after an orthopaedic device implantation when compared with antibiotic therapy alone.Methods and analysis This is an open-label, multicentre, randomised, parallel-group study that aims to assess the efficacy and safety of oxygen-ozone therapy in combination with oral antibiotic therapy to treat infections in patients (male or female aged ≥18 years) having undergone surgery for the implant of an orthopaedic device. Patients must have at least one (but no more than three) postoperative wounds in the site of surgery (ulcers, eschars and sores) and at least one symptom (pain, burning, redness and malodour) and at least one sign (erythema, local warmth, swelling and purulent secretion) of infection of at least moderate intensity (score ≥2) in the target lesion at the screening visit (patients with wounds without signs of localised infection or with undermining wounds will be excluded).Patients (n=186) will be recruited from five Italian hospitals and studied for 7 weeks. All will be assigned to one of the two treatment groups according to a web-based, centralised randomisation procedure and placed into either the (1) intervention: oxygen-ozone therapy 2–3 times a week for 6 weeks (for a maximum of 15 sessions) simultaneously with an appropriate oral antibiotic therapy prescribed at baseline or (2) control: oral antibiotic therapy prescribed at baseline.The primary outcome is the efficacy and superiority of the treatment (ozone and oral antibiotic therapies); secondary outcomes include the resolution of signs and symptoms, modifications in lesion size and the treatment’s safety and tolerability.Ethics and dissemination This study has been reviewed and approved by the responsible Independent Ethics Committee (IEC) of COMITATO ETICO CAMPANIA NORD, located at ‘Azienda Ospedaliera San Giuseppe Moscati di Avellino’.After completion of the study, the project coordinator will prepare a draft manuscript containing the final results of the study on the basis of the statistical analysis. The manuscript will be derived by the co-authors for comments, and after revision, it will be sent to a major scientific journal. Findings will be disseminated via online and print media, events and peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT04787575.

Abstract Background Rising incidence and prevalence of end-stage renal disease is a worldwide concern for sustainability of healthcare systems and societies. Living donor renal transplant [LDRT] provides highest health achievements and cost containment than any alternative form of renal replacement therapy. Nonetheless, about 25% of potential LDRTs are missed for causes directly related with inadequate timing in donor assessment. Our quality improvement (QI) project implement process control tools and strategy aiming at reducing total evaluation time for donor candidates and minimizing dialysis exposure for intended recipients, which are the two main determinants of clinical outcomes and costs. Methods The study includes patients who underwent donor nephrectomy between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2021. Six Sigma DMAIC approach was adopted to assess Base Case performance (Jan2017-Jun2019) and to design and implement our QI project. Study of current state analysis focused on distribution of time intervals within the assessment process, analysis of roles and impacts of involved healthcare providers and identification of targets of improvement. Improved Scenario (Jul2019-Dec2021) was assessed in terms of total lead time reduction, total pre-transplantation dialysis exposure and costs reduction, and increase in pre-emptive transplantations. The study was reported following SQUIRE 2.0 Guidelines for QI projects. Results Study population includes 63 patients, 37 in Base Case and 26 in Improved Scenario. Total lead time reduced from a median of 293 to 166 days and this in turn reduced pre-transplantation dialysis exposure and costs by 45%. Rate of potential pre-emptive donors’ loss changes from 44% to 27%. Conclusions Lean methodology is an effective tool to improve quality and efficiency of healthcare processes, in the interest of patients, healthcare professionals and payers.

Highlights 1. Different Covid-19 containment measures were adopted comparing five European countries 2. The earlier the restrictions were assumed, the better the response was achieved 3. Targeted measures before lockdown improved the curves compared with no restrictions

Introduction Prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is of key importance in reducing morbidity, disability and mortality worldwide. Observational studies suggest that digital health interventions can be an effective strategy to reduce cardiovascular (CV) risk. However, evidence from large randomised clinical trials is lacking.Methods and analysis The CV-PREVITAL study is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, open-label interventional trial designed to compare the effectiveness of an educational and motivational mobile health (mHealth) intervention versus usual care in reducing CV risk. The intervention aims at improving diet, physical activity, sleep quality, psycho-behavioural aspects, as well as promoting smoking cessation and adherence to pharmacological treatment for CV risk factors. The trial aims to enrol approximately 80 000 subjects without overt CVDs referring to general practitioners’ offices, community pharmacies or clinics of Scientific Institute for Research, Hospitalization and Health Care (Italian acronym IRCCS) affiliated with the Italian Cardiology Network. All participants are evaluated at baseline and after 12 months to assess the effectiveness of the intervention on short-term endpoints, namely improvement in CV risk score and reduction of major CV risk factors. Beyond the funded life of the study, a long-term (7 years) follow-up is also planned to assess the effectiveness of the intervention on the incidence of major adverse CV events. A series of ancillary studies designed to evaluate the effect of the mHealth intervention on additional risk biomarkers are also performed.Ethics and dissemination This study received ethics approval from the ethics committee of the coordinating centre (Monzino Cardiology Center; R1256/20-CCM 1319) and from all other relevant IRBs and ethics committees. Findings are disseminated through scientific meetings and peer-reviewed journals and via social media. Partners are informed about the study’s course and findings through regular meetings.Trial registration number NCT05339841.

Background and objectiveThe capacity to promote and disseminate the best evidence-based practices in terms of digital health innovations and technologies represents an important goal for countries and governments. To support the digital health maturity across countries the Global Digital Health Partnership (GDHP) was established in 2019. The mission of the GDHP is to facilitate global collaboration and knowledge-sharing in the design of digital health services, through the administration of surveys and white papers.ObjectiveThe scope of this study is to critically analyze and discuss results from the Evidence and Evaluation GDHP Work Stream’s survey, understand how governments and countries intend to address main obstacles to the digital health implementation, identify their strategies for a communication of effective digital health services, and promote the sharing of international based best practices on digital health.MethodsThis survey followed a cross-sectional study approach. A multiple-choice questionnaire was designed to gather data. Choices were extracted from research publications retrieved through a rapid review.ResultsOut of 29 countries receiving the survey, 10 returned it. On a scale from 1 to 5, eHealth systems/platforms (mean = 3.56) were indicated as the most important tool for centralized infrastructure to collect information on digital health, while primary care (mean = 4.0) represented the most voted item for healthcare services to collect information on digital health. Seven Countries out of 10 identified lack of organization, skepticism of clinicians, and accessibility of the population as a barriers to adopt digital health implementation, resulting to be the most voted items. Finally, the most endorsed priorities in digital health for Countries were the adoption of data-driven approaches (6 Countries), and telehealth (5 Countries).ConclusionThis survey highlighted the main tools and obstacles for countries to promote the implementation of evidence-based digital health innovations. Identifying strategies that would communicate the value of health care information technology to healthcare professionals are particularly imperative. Effective communication programs for clinicians and the general population in addition to improved digital health literacy (both for clinicians and citizens) will be the key for the real implementation of future digital health technologies.

Abstract Background Influenza is a major cause of morbidity, mortality and exacerbation of extant chronic disease worldwide. Influenza vaccination is thus fundamental to reduce the burden of disease. In this study, we describe the trend of influenza vaccination coverage in the seasons 2010/11–2020/21 among children aged

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) in the age of adolescence is a major public health issue, though it has not been widely examined in the scientific literature. This systematic review aims to address the determinants of VH among adolescents aged 10–19. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from the inception until 11 December 2020. Articles in English, assessing adolescents’ attitudes toward vaccination in terms of hesitancy and/or confidence were considered eligible. Out of 14,704 articles, 20 studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Quality assessment was performed through the Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS). A better knowledge of vaccine-preventable diseases, a higher confidence in vaccines, as well as an active involvement in the decision-making process showed a positive relationship with adolescents’ vaccine uptake. These aspects should be considered to plan tailored interventions for the promotion of vaccination among adolescents and to reduce VH. Major limitations of this review are represented by the high heterogeneity of the tools used in the primary studies and the lack of standardization in outcomes definitions. Future research is needed to disentangle the interrelationship among the different determinants of VH in this age group.

Vaccine hesitancy in healthcare workers (HCWs) has been studied for various contagious diseases, but there is still insufficient knowledge about this phenomenon for COVID-19. We developed and validated a knowledge, attitude, and practice survey of 39 questions to assess Italian HCWs’ hesitancy toward vaccination in general (general hesitancy), COVID-19 vaccination (COVID-19 hesitancy), and public health injunctive measures (refusal of obligations). The survey was administered through a web platform between July and November 2021. Three multivariable logistic regressions were performed to evaluate the association between the explored dimensions of hesitancy and the potential determinants investigated. Out of 2,132 respondents with complete answers, 17.0% showed to be generally hesitancy toward vaccination, 32.3% were hesitant on COVID-19 vaccination, while 18.8% were categorized as refusing obligations. A significant protective effect against all three dimensions of hesitancy was found for increasing fear of COVID-19, advising COVID-19 vaccination to relatives and patients, having received flu vaccination in the previous year and having higher levels of education. Better self-rated knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines and reading up institutional sources were significantly protective against general and COVID-19 hesitancy, while being a physician rather than another healthcare professional was protective only against COVID-19 hesitancy. Conversely, increasing age and referring to colleagues to expand knowledge about COVID-19 were positively associated with COVID-19 hesitancy. The determinants of general hesitancy, COVID-19 hesitancy and the refusal of obligations are mostly overlapping. Given the great influence they exert on patients and communities, it is pivotal to limit HCWs vaccine hesitancy through appropriate training activities.

Key stakeholders from the cancer research continuum met in May 2021 at the European Cancer Research Summit in Porto to discuss priorities and specific action points required for the successful implementation of the European Cancer Mission and Europe's Beating Cancer Plan (EBCP). Speakers presented a unified view about the need to establish high‐quality, networked infrastructures to decrease cancer incidence, increase the cure rate, improve patient's survival and quality of life, and deal with research and care inequalities across the European Union (EU). These infrastructures, featuring Comprehensive Cancer Centres (CCCs) as key components, will integrate care, prevention and research across the entire cancer continuum to support the development of personalized/precision cancer medicine in Europe. The three pillars of the recommended European infrastructures – namely translational research, clinical/prevention trials and outcomes research – were pondered at length. Speakers addressing the future needs of translational research focused on the prospects of multiomics assisted preclinical research, progress in Molecular and Digital Pathology, immunotherapy, liquid biopsy and science data. The clinical/prevention trial session presented the requirements for next‐generation, multicentric trials entailing unified strategies for patient stratification, imaging, and biospecimen acquisition and storage. The third session highlighted the need for establishing outcomes research infrastructures to cover primary prevention, early detection, clinical effectiveness of innovations, health‐related quality‐of‐life assessment, survivorship research and health economics. An important outcome of the Summit was the presentation of the Porto Declaration, which called for a collective and committed action throughout Europe to develop the cancer research infrastructures indispensable for fostering innovation and decreasing inequalities within and between member states. Moreover, the Summit guidelines will assist decision making in the context of a unique EU‐wide cancer initiative that, if expertly implemented, will decrease the cancer death toll and improve the quality of life of those confronted with cancer, and this is carried out at an affordable cost.

Walter Ricciardi discusses challenges and strategies to address the cancer pandemic within the European context, by featuring initiatives across Europe–like the Mission on Cancer. While continuing to foster research efforts, these initiatives aim at supporting and strengthening national commitments that should promote, on the one hand, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer, and, on the other hand, the quality of life of cancer patients, survivors, and their families as well as caregivers.

Introduction Several countries are either planning or implementing national strategies for the development and integration of Personalized Medicine (PM) into their healthcare systems. Personalized Medicine is an undisputed priority of the European Commission (EC), which has funded the project “Integrating China into the International Consortium for Personalized Medicine” (IC2PerMed), in order to ensure a common basis for Sino-European collaborations. By mapping the current PM landscape in the European Union (EU) and in China, IC2PerMed aims to provide key solutions toward a synergistic and coordinated approach in the field of PM. Methods An extensive desk research was conducted, aimed at identifying documents on PM-related policies, programs, and action plans in the EU and in China, published up to November 2020. The search was conducted by exploring scientific and gray literature, and official institutional repositories. A descriptive summary condensed the information retrieved for both. Results Since 2013, the year of publication of the first PM policy by the EC “Use of omics technologies in PM development,” several documents have been published. PM is a key element of the policy agenda also in China, which in 2016 integrated PM into the 13th National Five-Year Plan, followed by the publication of several policies on technology infrastructure and big data. Both in the EU and China, especially in recent years, these policies addressed in detail the issues of big data, data interoperability and exchange, while defining the standards of information and communication infrastructures. Conclusions In order to allow optimal collaboration, it is essential to understand similarities and differences between the respective policy strategies, with particular attention to data management and adopted infrastructures. The results of this project may enable the development of joint Sino-European research and innovation initiatives, promoting developments in the field of PM.

BackgroundTo promote shared digital health best practices in a global context, as agreed within the Global Digital Health Partnership (GDHP), one of the most important topics to evaluate is the ability to detect what participating countries believe to be priorities suitable to improve their healthcare systems. No previously published scientific papers investigated these aspects as a cross-country comparison.ObjectiveThe aim of this paper is to present results concerning the priorities identification section of the Evidence and Evaluation survey addressed to GDHP members in 2021, comparing countries’ initiatives and perspectives for the future of digital health based on internationally agreed developments.MethodsThis survey followed a cross-sectional study approach. An online survey was addressed to the stakeholders of 29 major countries.ResultsTen out of 29 countries answered the survey. The mean global score of 3.54 out of 5, calculated on the whole data set, demonstrates how the global attention to a digital evolution in health is shared by most of the evaluated countries.ConclusionThe resulting insights on the differences between digital health priority identification among different GDHP countries serves as a starting point to coordinate further progress on digital health worldwide and foster evidence-based collaboration.

BackgroundDigital health interventions have significant potential to improve safety, efficacy, and quality of care, reducing waste in healthcare costs. Despite these premises, the evidence regarding cost and effectiveness of digital tools in health is scarce and limited.ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions and to assess whether the studies meet the established quality criteria.MethodsWe queried PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for articles in English published from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 that performed economic evaluations of digital health technologies. The methodological rigorousness of studies was assessed with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2009 checklist.ResultsSearch identified 1,476 results, 552 of which were selected for abstract and 35 were included in this review. The studies were heterogeneous by country (mostly conducted in upper and upper-middle income countries), type of eHealth intervention, method of implementation, and reporting perspectives. The qualitative analysis identified the economic and effectiveness evaluation of six different types of interventions: (1) seventeen studies on new video-monitoring service systems; (2) five studies on text messaging interventions; (3) five studies on web platforms and digital health portals; (4) two studies on telephone support; (5) three studies on new mobile phone-based systems and applications; and (6) three studies on digital technologies and innovations.ConclusionFindings on cost-effectiveness of digital interventions showed a growing body of evidence and suggested a generally favorable effect in terms of costs and health outcomes. However, due to the heterogeneity across study methods, the comparison between interventions still remains difficult. Further research based on a standardized approach is needed in order to methodically analyze incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, costs, and health benefits.

BackgroundClinical trials are essential for bringing new drugs, technologies and procedures to the market and clinical practice. Considering the design and the four-phase development, only 10% of them complete the entire process, partly due to the increasing costs and complexity of clinical trials. This low completion rate has a huge negative impact in terms of population health, quality of care and health economics and sustainability. Automating some of the process' tasks with artificial intelligence (AI) tools could optimize some of the most burdensome ones, like patient selection, matching and enrollment; better patient selection could also reduce harmful treatment side effects. Although the pharmaceutical industry is embracing artificial AI tools, there is little evidence in the literature of their application in clinical trials.MethodsTo address this issue, we performed a scoping review. Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we performed a search on PubMed for articles on the implementation of AI in the development of clinical trials.ResultsThe search yielded 772 articles, of which 15 were included. The articles were published between 2019 and 2022 and the results were presented descriptively. About half of the studies addressed the topic of patient recruitment; 12 articles reported specific examples of AI applications; five studies presented a quantitative estimate of the effectiveness of these tools.ConclusionAll studies present encouraging results on the implementation of AI-based applications to the development of clinical trials. AI-based applications have a lot of potential, but more studies are needed to validate these tools and facilitate their adoption.

IntroductionCOVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 19) has rapidly spread all around the world. Vaccination represents one of the most promising counter-pandemic measures. There is still little specific evidence in literature on how to safely and effectively program access and flow through specific healthcare settings to avoid overcrowding in order to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Literature regarding appointment scheduling in healthcare is vast. Unpunctuality however, especially when targeting healthcare workers during working hours, is always possible. Therefore, when determining how many subjects to book, using a linear method assuming perfect adhesion to scheduled time could lead to organizational problems.MethodsThis study proposes a “Queuing theory” based approach. A COVID-19 vaccination site targeting healthcare workers based in a teaching hospital in Rome was studied to determine real-life arrival rate variability. Three simulations using Queueing theory were performed.ResultsQueueing theory application reduced subjects queueing over maximum safety requirements by 112 in a real-life based vaccination setting, by 483 in a double-sized setting and by 750 in a mass vaccination model compared with a linear approach. In the 3 settings, respectively, the percentage of station's time utilization was 98.6, 99.4 and 99.8%, while the average waiting time was 27.2, 33.84, and 33.84 min.ConclusionsQueueing theory has already been applied in healthcare. This study, in line with recent literature developments, proposes the adoption of a Queueing theory base approach to vaccination sites modeling, during the COVID-19 pandemic, as this tool enables to quantify ahead of time the outcome of organizational choices on both safety and performance of vaccination sites.

The recent progress of genomics research is providing unprecedented insight into human genetic variance, susceptibility to disease and risk stratification. Current trends predict that a massive amount of genomic data will be produced in the upcoming years which, when coupled with the fast-paced development of the field, will create new social, ethical, and legal challenges. In the complex legislative environment of the European Union, genomic data sharing policies will have to weigh the benefits of scientific discovery against the ethical risks posed by the act of sharing sensitive data. In this complex, interconnected environment, blockchain provides a unique and novel solution to accountability, traceability, and transparency issues regarding genomic data sharing. Implementing a distributed ledger technology-based database could empower both patients and citizens to responsibly use genomic data pertaining to them because it allows for a higher degree of control over the recipients of their data and their uses. The blockchain technology will engage both data owners and policymakers to address the multiple issues of genomic data sharing and allow us to redefine the way we look at genomics.

Summary: Background: Vaccine hesitancy continues to limit global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging research demonstrates the role of social media in disseminating information and potentially influencing people's attitudes towards public health campaigns. This systematic review sought to synthesize the current evidence regarding the potential role of social media in shaping COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, and to explore its potential for shaping public health interventions to address the issue of vaccine hesitancy. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the studies published from inception to 13 of March2022 by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsychNET, Scopus, CINAHL, and MEDLINE. Studies that reported outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (attitudes, opinion, etc.) gathered from the social media platforms, and those analyzing the relationship between social media use and COVID-19 hesitancy/acceptance were included. Studies that reported no outcome of interest or analyzed data from sources other than social media (websites, newspapers, etc.) will be excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all cross-sectional studies included in this review. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021283219). Findings: Of the 2539 records identified, a total of 156 articles fully met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the quality of the cross-sectional studies was moderate – 2 studies received 10 stars, 5 studies received 9 stars, 9 studies were evaluated with 8, 12 studies with 7,16 studies with 6, 11 studies with 5, and 6 studies with 4 stars. The included studies were categorized into four categories. Cross-sectional studies reporting the association between reliance on social media and vaccine intentions mainly observed a negative relationship. Studies that performed thematic analyses of extracted social media data, mainly observed a domination of vaccine hesitant topics. Studies that explored the degree of polarization of specific social media contents related to COVID-19 vaccines observed a similar degree of content for both positive and negative tone posted on different social media platforms. Finally, studies that explored the fluctuations of vaccination attitudes/opinions gathered from social media identified specific events as significant cofactors that affect and shape vaccination intentions of individuals. Interpretation: This thorough examination of the various roles social media can play in disseminating information to the public, as well as how individuals behave on social media in the context of public health events, articulates the potential of social media as a platform of public health intervention to address vaccine hesitancy. Funding: None.

Abstract Background Italy was the first European country to implement a national lockdown because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Worldwide, this pandemic had a huge impact on the mental health of people in many countries causing similar reaction in terms of emotions and concerns at the population level. Our study investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological well-being in a cohort of Italian university students. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey in the period immediately after the first lockdown through the administration of a questionnaire on the personal websites of students attending their undergraduate courses at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore. We used the Patient-Health-Engagement-Scale, Self-Rating-Anxiety-Scale, and Self-Rating-Depression-Scale to assess engagement, anxiety symptoms, and depression symptoms of our sample. Results The sample size was 501 subjects, of which 35.33% were classified as anxious and 72.93% as depressed. Over 90% of respondents had good understanding of the preventive measures despite over 70% suffered from the impossibility of physically seeing friends and partners. Around 55% of students would have been willing to contribute much more to face the pandemic. An increase in the occurrences of anxiety was associated with being female, being student of the Rome campus, suffering from the impossibility of attending university, being distant from colleagues, and being unable of physically seeing one’s partner. Performing physical activity reduced this likelihood. Conclusion University students are at risk of psychological distress in the case of traumatic events. The evolution of the pandemic is uncertain and may have long-term effects on mental health. Therefore, it is crucial to study the most effective interventions to identify vulnerable subgroups and to plan for acute and long-term psychological services to control and reduce the burden of psychological problems.

Abstract Background Suspending ordinary care activities during the COVID-19 pandemic made it necessary to find alternative routes to comply with care recommendations not only for acute health needs but also for patients requiring follow-up and multidisciplinary visits. We present the ‘Contactless’ model, a comprehensive operational tool including a plurality of services delivered remotely, structured according to a complexity gradient, aimed to cover diagnostic procedures and monitor disease progression in chronic pediatric patients. Methods A multidisciplinary and multiprofessional project team was recruited, in collaboration with patients’ associations, to map a panel of available Evidence-Based solutions and address individual needs in full respect of the concept of personalized medicine. The solutions include a number of services from videoconsultations to more structure videotraining sessions. Results A modular framework made up of four three Macro-levels of complexity - Contactless Basic, Intermediate and Advanced - was displayed as an incremental set of services and operational planning establishing each phase, from factors influencing eligibility to the delivery of the most accurate and complex levels of care. Conclusion The multimodal, multidisciplinary ‘Contactless’ model allowed the inclusion of all Units of our Pediatric Department and families with children with disability or complex chronic conditions. The strengths of this project rely on its replicability outside of pediatrics and in the limited resources needed to practically impact patients, caregivers and professionals involved in the process of care. Its implementation in the future may contribute to reduce the duration of hospital admissions, money and parental absence from work.

Microbial contamination in the hospital environment is a major concern for public health, since it significantly contributes to the onset of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), which are further complicated by the alarming level of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) of HAI-associated pathogens. Chemical disinfection to control bioburden has a temporary effect and can favor the selection of resistant pathogens, as observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead, probiotic-based sanitation (probiotic cleaning hygiene system, PCHS) was reported to stably abate pathogens, AMR, and HAIs. PCHS action is not rapid nor specific, being based on competitive exclusion, but the addition of lytic bacteriophages that quickly and specifically kill selected bacteria was shown to improve PCHS effectiveness. This study aimed to investigate the effect of such combined probiotic–phage sanitation (PCHSφ) in two Italian hospitals, targeting staphylococcal contamination. The results showed that PCHSφ could provide a significantly higher removal of staphylococci, including resistant strains, compared with disinfectants (−76%, p < 0.05) and PCHS alone (−50%, p < 0.05). Extraordinary sporadic chlorine disinfection appeared compatible with PCHSφ, while frequent routine chlorine usage inactivated the probiotic/phage components, preventing PCHSφ action. The collected data highlight the potential of a biological sanitation for better control of the infectious risk in healthcare facilities, without worsening pollution and AMR concerns.

ObjectivesTo provide a new value-based immunization approach collating the available scientific evidence on the topic.MethodsFour value pillars (personal, allocative, technical, and societal) applied to vaccination field were investigated. A systematic literature review was performed querying three database from December 24th, 2010 to May 27th, 2020. It included studies on vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) that mentioned the term value in any part and which were conducted in advanced economies. An in-depth analysis was performed on studies addressing value as key element.ResultsOverall, 107 studies were considered. Approximately half of the studies addressed value as a key element but in most of cases (83.3%) only a single pillar was assessed. Furthermore, the majority of papers addressed the technical value by looking only at classical methods for economic assessment of vaccinations whereas very few dealt with societal and allocative pillars.ConclusionsEstimating the vaccinations value is very complex, even though their usefulness is certain. The assessment of the whole value of vaccines and vaccinations is still limited to some domains and should encompass the wider impact on economic growth and societies.

Abstract Background Tumor Boards (TBs) are Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) meetings in which different specialists work together closely sharing clinical decisions in cancer care. The composition is variable, depending on the type of tumor discussed. As an organizational tool, MDTs are thought to optimize patient outcomes and to improve care performance. The aim of the study was to perform an umbrella review summarizing the available evidence on the impact of TBs on healthcare outcomes and processes. Methods Pubmed and Web of Science databases were investigated along with a search through citations. The only study design included was systematic review. Only reviews published after 1997 concerning TBs and performed in hospital settings were considered. Two researchers synthetized the studies and assessed their quality through the AMSTAR2 tool. Results Five systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2017 were retrieved. One review was focused on gastrointestinal cancers and included 16 studies; another one was centered on lung cancer and included 16 studies; the remaining three studies considered a wide range of tumors and included 27, 37 and 51 studies each. The main characteristics about format and members and the definition of TBs were collected. The decisions taken during TBs led to changes in diagnosis (probability to receive a more accurate assessment and staging), treatment (usually more appropriate) and survival (not unanimous improvement shown). Other outcomes less highlighted were quality of life, satisfaction and waiting times. Conclusions The study showed that the multidisciplinary approach is the best way to deliver the complex care needed by cancer patients; however, it is a challenge that requires organizational and cultural changes and must be led by competent health managers who can improve teamwork within their organizations. Further studies are needed to reinforce existing literature concerning health outcomes. Evidence on the impact of TBs on clinical practices is still lacking for many aspects of cancer care. Further studies should aim to evaluate the impact on survival rates, quality of life and patient satisfaction. Regular studies should be carried out and new process indicators should be defined to assess the impact and the performance of TBs more consistently.

IntroductionWorking during the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic healthcare workers (HCWs) had to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPEs) for extended periods of time, leading to an increase in dermatological reactions. The study evaluates the prevalence of adverse skin reactions to PPEs among Italian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and aims to determine whether prolonged PPEs usage poses a significant occupational health risk, by measuring the loss of work days and the eligibility of workers that requested health surveillance due to dermatological PPEs reactions.Materials and MethodsAn online ad hoc questionnaire was administered to a sample of Italian HCWs. Questions verted on sociodemographic characteristics, PPEs usage, and occupational well-being. Descriptive analyses and logistic regressions were performed to explore possible associations between variables.ResultsTwo types of PPEs, Gloves and Masks, were tested. The sample included 1,223 interviewed HCWs, 1,184 gave their consent for participation. A total of 90 medical surveillance visits were requested due to PPEs related dermatological issues: in 30 cases were recognized limitations in working duties and in one case the worker was deemed not fit to keep working. Furthermore, 25 workers had a loss of occupational days due to dermatological issues. A statistically significant correlation was observed with being a nurse or midwife (OR = 1.91, IC = 1.38–2.63, p < 0.001), and being female (OR = 2.04, IC = 1.49–2.78, p < 0.001), which acted as risk factors.DiscussionThe enhanced protection measures put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlight the importance of occupational dermatology. This study could contribute to assess the issue, aiming to develop better prevention strategies in the workplace in order to improve well-being of HCWs and reduce the impact of dermatological adverse reactions to PPEs.

Objectives: In recent years, Italy has been registering peaks in death rates, particularly among the elderly during the winter season. Influenza epidemics have been indicated as one of the potential determinants of such an excess. The objective of our study was to estimate the influenza-attributable contribution to excess mortality during the influenza seasons from 2013/14 to 2016/17 in Italy. Methods: We used the EuroMomo and the FluMomo methods to estimate the annual trend of influenza-attributable excess death rate by age group. Population data were provided by the National Institute of Statistics, data on influenza like illness and confirmed influenza cases were provided by the National Institutes of Health. As an indicator of weekly influenza activity (IA) we adopted the Goldstein index, which is the product of the percentage of patients seen with influenza-like illness (ILI) and percentage of influenza-positive specimens, in a given week. Results: We estimated excess deaths of 7,027, 20,259, 15,801 and 24,981 attributable to influenza epidemics in the 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17, respectively, using the Goldstein index. The average annual mortality excess rate per 100,000 ranged from 11.6 to 41.2 with most of the influenza-associated deaths per year registered among the elderly. However children less than 5 years old also reported a relevant influenza attributable excess death rate in the 2014/15 and 2016/17 seasons (1.05/100,000 and 1.54/100,000 respectively). Conclusions: Over 68,000 deaths were attributable to influenza epidemics in the study period. The observed excess of deaths is not completely unexpected, given the high number of fragile very old subjects living in Italy. In conclusion, the unpredictability of the influenza virus continues to present a major challenge to health professionals and policy makers. Nonetheless, vaccination remains the most effective means for reducing the burden of influenza, and efforts to increase vaccine coverage and the introduction of new vaccine strategies (such as vaccinating healthy children) should be considered to reduce the influenza attributable excess mortality experienced in Italy and in Europe in the last seasons. Keywords: Flu, Mortality, Italy, Vaccination

Background: High rates of vaccination worldwide are required to establish a herd immunity and stop the current COVID-19 pandemic evolution. Vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier in achieving herd immunity across different populations. This study sought to conduct a systematic review of the current literature regarding attitudes and hesitancy to receiving COVID-19 vaccination worldwide. Methods: A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science was performed on July 5th, 2021, using developed keywords. Inclusion criteria required the study to (1) be conducted in English; (2) investigate attitudes, hesitancy, and/or barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among a given population; (3) utilize validated measurement techniques; (4) have the full text paper available and be peer-reviewed prior to final publication. Findings: Following PRISMA guidelines, 209 studies were included. The Newcastle Ottawa (NOS) scale for cross-sectional studies was used to assess the quality of the studies.Overall, vaccine acceptance rates ranged considerably between countries and between different time points, with Arabian countries showing the highest hesitancy rates compared with other parts of the world. Interpretation: A variety of different factors contributed to increased hesitancy, including having negative perception of vaccine efficacy, safety, convenience, and price. Some of the consistent socio-demographic groups that were identified to be associated with increased hesitancy included: women, younger participants, and people who were less educated, had lower income, had no insurance, living in a rural area, and self-identified as a racial/ethnic minority.

BackgroundPatient portals are becoming increasingly popular worldwide even though their impact on individual health and health system efficiency is still unclear. ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to summarize evidence on the impact of patient portals on health outcomes and health care efficiency, and to examine user characteristics, attitudes, and satisfaction. MethodsWe searched the PubMed and Web of Science databases for articles published from January 1, 2013, to October 31, 2019. Eligible studies were primary studies reporting on the impact of patient portal adoption in relation to health outcomes, health care efficiency, and patient attitudes and satisfaction. We excluded studies where portals were not accessible for patients and pilot studies, with the exception of articles evaluating patient attitudes. ResultsOverall, 3456 records were screened, and 47 articles were included. Among them, 11 studies addressed health outcomes reporting positive results, such as better monitoring of health status, improved patient-doctor interaction, and improved quality of care. Fifteen studies evaluated the impact of digital patient portals on the utilization of health services with mixed results. Patient characteristics were described in 32 studies, and it was reported that the utilization rate usually increases with age and female gender. Finally, 30 studies described attitudes and defined the main barriers (concerns about privacy and data security, and lack of time) and facilitators (access to clinical data and laboratory results) to the use of a portal. ConclusionsEvidence regarding health outcomes is generally favorable, and patient portals have the potential to enhance the doctor-patient relationship, improve health status awareness, and increase adherence to therapy. It is still unclear whether the use of patient portals improves health service utilization and efficiency.

The provisions adopted in Italy for clinical trials on medicinal products and medical devices for the epidemiological emergency caused by COVID-19 had an impact also on the functioning of Ethics Committees (ECs). All COVID-19 clinical trials are evaluated preliminarily by the Technical Scientific Committee of the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA). They are then evaluated by the Clinical Trial Office of the Competent Authority (AIFA) and by the EC of the Lazzaro Spallanzani National Institute for Infectious Diseases. On the basis of this experience, several parties have recommended the adoption of a new structure that envisages the involvement of a single EC for the activation of new studies, similar to the system put in place for studies on COVID-19.Rather than a single EC with jurisdiction over the entire country, we could envisage the accreditation of a certain number of ECs, possibly subdivided by therapeutic fields, with the trials to be evaluated distributed among them, so that each is authorised to issue an opinion that is valid nationally.

The current COVID pandemic crisis made it even clearer that the solutions to several questions that public health must face require the access to good quality data. Several issues of the value and potential of health data and the current critical issues that hinder access are discussed in this paper. In particular, the paper (i) focuses on “real-world data” definition; (ii) proposes a review of the real-world data availability in our country; (iii) discusses its potential, with particular focus on the possibility of improving knowledge on the quality of care provided by the health system; (iv) emphasizes that the availability of data alone is not sufficient to increase our knowledge, underlining the need that innovative analysis methods (e.g., artificial intelligence techniques) must be framed in the paradigm of clinical research; and (v) addresses some ethical issues related to their use. The proposal is to realize an alliance between organizations interested in promoting research aimed at collecting scientifically solid evidence to support the clinical governance of public health.

The objectives of the study were to calculate the standardised mortality rates (SMRs) for COVID-19 in European Union/European Economic Area countries plus the UK and Switzerland and to evaluate the correlation between SMRs and selected indicators in the first versus the subsequent waves until 23 June 2021. We used indirect standardisation (using Italy as the reference) to compute SMRs and considered 16 indicators of health and social well-being, health system capacity and COVID-19 response. The highest SMRs were in Belgium, the UK and Spain in the first wave (1.20–1.84) and in Hungary, Czechia and Slovakia in the subsequent waves (2.50–2.69). Human Development Index (HDI), life expectancy, urbanisation and healthcare expenditure had positive correlations with SMR in the first wave (rho=0.30–0.46), but negative correlations (rho=−0.67 to −0.47) in the subsequent waves. Retail/recreation mobility and transit mobility were negatively correlated with SMR in the first wave, while transit mobility was inversely correlated with SMR in the subsequent waves. The first wave hit most hard countries with high HDI, high life expectancy, high urbanisation, high health expenditures and high tourism. This pattern may reflect higher early community seeding and circulation of the virus. Conversely, in the subsequent waves, this pattern was completely inversed: countries with more resources and better health status did better than eastern European countries. While major SMR differences existed across countries in the first wave, these differences largely dissipated by 23 June 2021, with few exceptions.

Healthcare workers (HCWs), particularly physicians, are a relevant and trusted source of information for patients, especially when health-related choices such as vaccination are concerned. Between July and November 2022, we administered a web-based survey to physicians and dentists living in the Latio region of Italy to explore whether their background might affect their willingness to recommend the COVID-19 vaccination to their patients (RCVtoPat) and their relatives (RCVtoRel). We performed a multivariable logistic regression to study the association between the two outcomes (RCVtoPat and RCVtoRel) and their potential determinants in our sample (n = 1464). We found that being a dentist, an increasing fear of COVID-19, and having been previously vaccinated against flu are positively associated with both RCVtoPat and RCVtoRel, while a better self-rated knowledge of COVID-19 vaccines is associated only with RCVtoRel. No role was found for age, sex, civil status, education level, information sources, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and chronic diseases. A sub-group analysis of physicians alone (n = 1305) demonstrated a positive association with RCVtoRel of being specialized in diagnostic/therapeutic services and a negative effect on RCVtoPat of being trained in general practice. We provide useful insights about the factors that should be addressed to ensure HCWs exert a positive influence on their patients and communities.

At the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, individual and social measures were strengthened through restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions, labelled with the term “lockdown”. In Italy, there were two lockdowns (9 March 2020–3 May 2020 and 3 November 2020–27 March 2021). As part of preventive measures, healthcare workers and the administrative staff population of Policlinico A. Gemelli underwent nasopharyngeal swab tests from 1 March 2020 to 9 February 2022, a long time interval that includes the two aforementioned lockdowns. The population included 8958 people from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2020; 8981 people from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021; and 8981 people from 1 January 2022 to 9 February 2022. We then analysed pseudo-anonymized data, using a retrospective observational approach to evaluate the impact of the lockdown on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections within the population. Given the 14 day contagious period, the swab positivity rate (SPR) among the staff decreased significantly at the end of the first lockdown, every day prior to 18 May 2020, by 0.093 (p < 0.0001, CI = (−0.138–−0.047)). After the fourteenth day post the end of the first lockdown (18 May 2020), the SPR increased daily at a rate of 0.024 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI = (0.013–0.034)). In addition, the SPR appeared to increase significantly every day prior to 17 November 2020 by 0.024 (p < 0.0001, CI = (0.013–0.034)). After the fourteenth day post the start of the second lockdown (17 November 2020), the SPR decreased daily at a rate of 0.039 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI = (−0.050–−0.027)). These data demonstrate that, in our Institution, the lockdowns helped to both protect healthcare workers and maintain adequate standards of care for COVID and non-COVID patients for the duration of the state of emergency in Italy.

Background: Seasonal influenza has a considerable public health impact, and vaccination is the key to preventing its consequences. Our aim was to describe how the value of influenza vaccination is addressed in the scientific literature considering a new value framework based on four pillars (personal, allocative, technical, and societal value). Methods: A systematic review was conducted by querying three databases. The analysis was performed on international studies focused on influenza vaccination value, and the four value pillars were taken into consideration for their description. Results: Overall, 40 studies were considered. Most of them focused on influenza vaccination in the general population (27.5%), emphasizing its value for all age groups. Most studies addressed technical value (70.4%), especially in terms of economic models and cost drivers to be considered for the economic evaluations of influenza vaccines, and societal value (63%), whereas few dealt with personal (37%) and allocative values (22.2%). Conclusions: The whole value of influenza vaccination is still not completely recognized. Knowledge and communication of the whole value of influenza vaccination is essential to guide value-based health policies. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to implement initiatives that involve all relevant stakeholders.

The COVID-19 vaccination has proven to be the most effective prevention measure, reducing deaths and hospitalizations and allowing, in combination with non-pharmacological interventions, the pandemic to be tackled. Although most of the adverse reactions to vaccination present mild symptoms and serious effects are very rare, they can be the cause of legal action against the healthcare workers (HCWs) who administered it. To highlight differences in the medical liability systems, we performed a search for the three most populous countries in each continent on vaccine injury compensation programs, new laws or policies to protect HCWs administering vaccinations introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, and policies on mandatory vaccinations, on literature databases and institutional sites. We found that in seven countries the medical liability system is based on Common Law, while in eleven it is mainly based on Civil Law. Considering the application of specific laws to protect HCWs who vaccinate during the pandemic, only the USA and Canada provided immunity from liability. Among the countries we analyzed, fourteen have adopted compensation funds. From an international perspective, our results highlight that in eleven (61.1%) countries medical liability is mainly based on Civil Law, whilst in seven (38.9%) it is based on Common Law.

Background: Vaccination coverages need to be constantly maintained and improved with the implementation of vaccination strategies. This paper describes the development of an evidence-based tool to guide their planning and evaluation.Methods: A scoping review was performed in MEDLINE and institutional websites to search for similar available tools. A first version of the tool was developed considering review results and a four-step method used for the control and continuous improvement of processes and products, namely the Deming cycle. A panel of eight experts was then involved in a Delphi study for the finalization of the tool that was eventually discussed in a face-to-face meeting.Results: The scoping review found only one document and the first version of the tool was composed of 30 items. After the Delphi first round, 11 additional items were suggested and 5 original items amended. After the Delphi second round 41 items were eventually included. During the face-to-face meeting, 7 items were recognized as requisites for setting vaccination strategies, whereas 17 as relevant ones.Conclusions: Current public health challenges impose the need for evidence-based tools to organize effective vaccination strategies. Our tool is a first proposal which aims to reflect this focus.