Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
Telehealth and Medicine Today ; 8(3), 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20233852

ABSTRACT

Background: The literature supporting telehealth management is growing accelerated by the COVID-pandemic. We hypothesize that there are risks of adverse events associated with telehealth interventions. Methods: A review of PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, ISI (Web of Science), VHL/GHL, Scopus, Science Direct, and PsycINFO was conducted for all adverse events associated with telehealth from January 1, 1960 to March 1, 2021. This systematic review and meta-analyses were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Of 5,144 citations 78 published studies met criteria for quality evaluation and underwent full text ion including the qualitative synthesis. Of the 78 included studies 8 were included in the quantitative synthesis resulting in 2 meta-analyses. The results of the meta-analysis suggest that monitoring patients using telehealth techniques is associated with 40% lower mortality risks among patients suffering from heart failure, compared to those who received traditional care. The results of the random-effects meta-analysis showed the pooled relative risk of mortality to be 0.60, indicating that patients that underwent telemonitoring had a lower mortality risk compared with the patients that underwent usual care. Among patients with heart implants, patients who received telemonitoring had a 35% lower mortality risk compared to patients receiving traditional care. Conclusions: While RCTs of telehealth interventions demonstrate enhanced patient outcomes in a number of studies and pave the way to evidence-based practice, the heterogeneity of the research questions suggest an important need for more complementary studies with consistent outcome assessments.

3.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(11)2022 Oct 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2099897

ABSTRACT

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.

4.
European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Copenhagen (Denmark) ; 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2045426

ABSTRACT

Digital health tools hold the potential to improve the efficiency, accessibility and quality of care. Before the pandemic, efforts had been made to support implementation across Europe over many years, but widespread adoption in practice had been difficult and slow. The greatest barriers to adoption of digital health tools were not primarily technical in nature, but instead lay in successfully facilitating the required individual, organizational and system changes. During the COVID-19 pandemic many digital health tools moved from being viewed as a potential opportunity to becoming an immediate necessity, and their use increased substantially. Digital health tools have been used during the pandemic to support four main areas: communication and information, including tackling misinformation;surveillance and monitoring;the continuing provision of health care such as through remote consultations;and the rollout and monitoring of vaccination programmes. Greater use of digital health tools during the pandemic has been facilitated by: policy changes to regulation and reimbursement;investment in technical infrastructure;and training for health professionals. As the pandemic comes under control, if health systems are to retain added value from greater use of digital health tools, active strategies are needed now to build on the current momentum around their use. Areas to consider while developing such strategies include: Ensuring clear system-level frameworks and reimbursement regimes for the use of digital health tools, while allowing scope for co-design of digital health solutions by patients and health professionals for specific uses. Combining local flexibility with monitoring and evaluation to learn lessons and ensure that digital health tools help to meet wider health system goals.

5.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 1765, 2022 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2038702

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: European countries are still searching to eliminate or contain the Covid-19 pandemic. A variety of approaches have achieved different levels of success in limiting the spread of the disease early and preventing avoidable deaths. Governmental policy responses may explain these differences and this study aims to describe evidence about the effectiveness of containment measures throughout the course of the pandemic in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK). METHODS: The research approach adopted consisted of three steps: 1) Build a Containment Index (C.I.) that considers nine parameters to make an assessment on the strength of measures; 2) Develop dynamic epidemiological models for forecasting purposes; 3) Predict case numbers by assuming containment measures remain constant for a period of 30 days. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that in the five European countries we compared, the use of different approaches definitively affected the effectiveness of containment measures for the Covid-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: The evidence found in our research can be useful to inform policy makers' decisions when deciding to introduce or relax containment measures and their timing, both during the current pandemic or in addressing possible future health crises.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Europe/epidemiology , France/epidemiology , Germany , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control
6.
EClinicalMedicine ; 51: 101564, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1936335
7.
Front Public Health ; 10: 815674, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1933884

ABSTRACT

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic involved the disruption of the processes of care and the need for immediately effective re-organizational procedures. In the context of digital health, it is of paramount importance to determine how a specific patients' population reflects into the healthcare dynamics of the hospital, to investigate how patients' sub-group/strata respond to the different care processes, in order to generate novel hypotheses regarding the most effective healthcare strategies. We present an analysis pipeline based on the heterogeneous collected data aimed at identifying the most frequent healthcare processes patterns, jointly analyzing them with demographic and physiological disease trajectories, and stratify the observed cohort on the basis of the mined patterns. This is a process-oriented pipeline which integrates process mining algorithms, and trajectory mining by topological data analyses and pseudo time approaches. Data was collected for 1,179 COVID-19 positive patients, hospitalized at the Italian Hospital "Istituti Clinici Salvatore Maugeri" in Lombardy, integrating different sources including text admission letters, EHR and hospital infrastructure data. We identified five temporal phenotypes, from laboratory values trajectories, which are characterized by statistically significant different death risk estimates. The process mining algorithms allowed splitting the data in sub-cohorts as function of the pandemic waves and of the temporal trajectories showing statistically significant differences in terms of events characteristics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Electronic Health Records , Algorithms , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Phenotype
8.
EClinicalMedicine ; 48: 101454, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1850965

ABSTRACT

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.

10.
EClinicalMedicine ; 40: 101113, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1385455

ABSTRACT

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.

11.
BMJ Glob Health ; 5(12)2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1004157

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several healthcare systems facing respiratory viral infections outbreaks, like COVID-19, have not been prepared to manage them. Public health mitigation solutions ranging from isolation of infected or suspected cases to implementation of national lockdowns have proven their effectiveness for the outbreak's control. However, the adjustment of public health measures is crucial during transition phases to avoid new outbreaks. To address the need for designing evidence-based strategies, we performed a systematic review to identify healthcare systems interventions, experiences and recommendations that have been used to manage different respiratory viral infections outbreaks in the past. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane were searched to retrieve eligible studies of any study design, published in English until 17 April 2020. Double-blinded screening process was conducted by titles/abstracts and subsequently eligible full texts were read and pertinent data were extracted. When applicable, quality assessment was conducted for the included articles. We performed a narrative synthesis of each implemented public health approaches. RESULTS: We included a total of 24 articles addressing the public health approaches implemented for respiratory viral infections outbreaks for COVID-19, influenza A H1N1, MERS and severe acute respiratory syndrome . The identified approaches are ascribable to two main categories: healthcare system strategies and healthcare provider interventions. The key components of an effective response on respiratory viral outbreaks included the implementation of evidence-based contextual policies, intrahospital management actions, community healthcare facilities, non-pharmaceutical interventions, enhanced surveillance, workplace preventive measures, mental health interventions and communication plans. CONCLUSION: The identified healthcare system strategies applied worldwide to face epidemics or pandemics are a useful knowledge base to inform decision-makers about control measures to be used in the transition phases of COVID-19 and beyond.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Tract Infections/physiopathology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Viral Load , Humans
12.
Front Public Health ; 8: 620416, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1004713

ABSTRACT

Background: Europe overall suffered greatly in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic but the impact of different countries varied. Italy was in the forefront, but there too there were differences, with the Lombardy region the epicentre of the pandemic. Methods: We report Crude Mortality Rates (CMRs) from deaths reported as due to COVID-19 and, in five countries where age-specific data are available, Standardized Mortality Rates (SMRs) in the European Union and United Kingdom. Results: As of 30th August 2020, Belgium was the country with the highest cumulative CMR (86.3/100,000), but the Lombardy region reached almost double this figure (167.6/100,000), far ahead of the corresponding figure for the rest of Italy at 37.0/100,000. SMRs could be calculated for five countries (Italy, Portugal, Sweden, Germany, and Netherlands). Among them, Sweden had the highest SMR (61.6/100,000). The corresponding figures for Italy, Netherlands, Portugal and Germany were 50.2, 41.4, 15.9, and 10.1 per 100,000, respectively. Conclusion: It is clear that countries within Europe have performed very differently in their responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the many limitations in the available data must be addressed before a definitive assessment of the reasons for these differences can be made.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Models, Statistical , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Child , Child, Preschool , European Union , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL