A Systematic Review Identifying Adverse Health Outcomes and Mortality Rates Associated with Telehealth

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.

Impact of the COVID pandemic on mental health and training opportunities of Public Health Residents from 4 European countries: A cross-sectional study.

Objectives: There is little evidence on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Public Health Residents' (PHR) mental health (MH). This study aims at assessing prevalence and risk factors for depression, anxiety and stress in European PHR during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Between March and April 2021, an online survey was administered to PHR from France, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The survey assessed COVID-19 related changes in working conditions, training opportunities and evaluated MH outcomes using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21. Multivariable logistic regressions were applied to identify risk factors. Results: Among the 443 respondents, many showed symptoms of depression (60.5%), anxiety (43.1%) and stress (61.2%). The main outcome predictors were: female gender for depression (adjOR = 1.59, 95%CI [1.05-2.42]), anxiety (adjOR = 2.03, 95%CI [1.33-3.08]), and stress (adjOR = 2.35, 95%CI [1.53-3.61]); loss of research opportunities for anxiety (adjOR = 1.94, 95%CI [1.28-2.93]) and stress (adjOR = 1.98, 95%CI [1.26-3.11]); and COVID-19 impact on training (adjOR = 1.78, 95%CI [1.12-2.80]) for depression. Conclusions: The pandemic had a significant impact on PHR in terms of depression, anxiety and stress, especially for women and who lost work-related opportunities. Training programs should offer PHR appropriate MH support and training opportunities.

A cross-country comparison of Covid-19 containment measures and their effects on the epidemic curves.

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.

Social media and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review of the literature.

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.

Attitudes, acceptance and hesitancy among the general population worldwide to receive the COVID-19 vaccines and their contributing factors: A systematic review.

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.