Long-term outcome of COVID-19 patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation vs. high-flow nasal oxygen: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes of patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are unknown: safety concerns regarding the risk of patient self-inflicted lung injury and delayed intubation exist when NIV is applied in hypoxemic patients. We assessed the 6-month outcome of patients who received helmet NIV or high-flow nasal oxygen for COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis of a randomized trial of helmet NIV versus high-flow nasal oxygen (HENIVOT), clinical status, physical performance (6-min-walking-test and 30-s chair stand test), respiratory function and quality of life (EuroQoL five dimensions five levels questionnaire, EuroQoL VAS, SF36 and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for the DSM) were evaluated 6 months after the enrollment. RESULTS: Among 80 patients who were alive, 71 (89%) completed the follow-up: 35 had received helmet NIV, 36 high-flow oxygen. There was no inter-group difference in any item concerning vital signs (N = 4), physical performance (N = 18), respiratory function (N = 27), quality of life (N = 21) and laboratory tests (N = 15). Arthralgia was significantly lower in the helmet group (16% vs. 55%, p = 0.002). Fifty-two percent of patients in helmet group vs. 63% of patients in high-flow group had diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide < 80% of predicted (p = 0.44); 13% vs. 22% had forced vital capacity < 80% of predicted (p = 0.51). Both groups reported similar degree of pain (p = 0.81) and anxiety (p = 0.81) at the EQ-5D-5L test; the EQ-VAS score was similar in the two groups (p = 0.27). Compared to patients who successfully avoided invasive mechanical ventilation (54/71, 76%), intubated patients (17/71, 24%) had significantly worse pulmonary function (median diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide 66% [Interquartile range: 47-77] of predicted vs. 80% [71-88], p = 0.005) and decreased quality of life (EQ-VAS: 70 [53-70] vs. 80 [70-83], p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure, treatment with helmet NIV or high-flow oxygen yielded similar quality of life and functional outcome at 6 months. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation was associated with worse outcomes. These data indicate that helmet NIV, as applied in the HENIVOT trial, can be safely used in hypoxemic patients. Trial registration Registered on clinicaltrials.gov NCT04502576 on August 6, 2020.

Pandemic Preparedness among Big Energy Companies: Call to Research and Action.

The COVID-19 pandemic, as a global phenomenon, has affected all the working realities, worldwide, with the same issues. The aim of the present work is to assess the experiences of management and their preparedness during the pandemic among big companies, in particular, in the energy sector. Based on an overview of scientific evidence and grey literature, we found that big companies followed evidence-based decision-making practices and offered preparedness and information plans. Specifically, these plans contained recommendations and best practices to be followed to avoid the risk of infection in the workplaces, as well as in the field of epidemiological surveillance and vaccination. Nevertheless, many research efforts are required, and it is important that a large number of big companies and corporations address these challenges worldwide, adopting a new sustainable approach that includes both the productivity and health of the workers. A Call to Action was then issued in order to achieve evidence-based leadership to address current and future public health emergency scenarios.

Coping with burnout and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on workers' mental health: A systematic review.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on the psychological wellbeing of workers worldwide. Certain coping styles may increase burnout risk. To investigate the relationship between burnout and coping styles, a systematic review was performed. Methods: Following the PRISMA statements, three databases were screened up until October 2022, including research articles written in English language and investigating the relationship between burnout and coping strategies in workers. The quality of articles was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: The initial search resulted in 3,413 records, 15 of which were included in this review. Most studies were performed on healthcare workers (n = 13, 86.6%) and included a majority of female workers (n = 13, 86.7%). The most used burnout assessment questionnaire was the Maslach Burnout Inventory (n = 8, 53.3%), and the most used coping assessment tool was the Brief-COPE (n = 6, 40.0%). Task-related coping was a protective factor for burnout in all four studies investigating its correlation with burnout dimensions. Two of the four studies investigating emotion-oriented coping found that it was protective while the other two found that it was predictive of burnout. All five studies investigating avoidance-oriented coping and burnout dimensions found that this coping style was predictive of burnout. Discussion: Task-oriented and adaptive coping were protective for burnout, avoidance-oriented, and maladaptive coping were predictive factors of burnout. Mixed results were highlighted concerning emotion-oriented coping, suggesting that different outcomes of this coping style may depend on gender, with women relying more on it than men. In conclusion, further research is needed to investigate the effect of coping styles in individuals, and how these correlates with their unique characteristics. Training workers about appropriate coping styles to adopt may be essential to enact prevention strategies to reduce burnout incidence in workers.

A Cohort Study on Influenza Vaccine and All-Cause Mortality in Older Adults: Methodological Concerns and Public Health Implications.

INTRODUCTION: In 2020, the restrictions adopted to control the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic led to an unprecedented reduction in influenza-related burden. As such, the reduced chance to characterize the circulating virus strains might have increased the risk of vaccine mismatch for the forthcoming winter seasons. The role of an effective influenza vaccination campaign might therefore assume even more value, especially for frail and multimorbid older individuals. Methodological concerns on confounding by indication are always debated in vaccine effectiveness studies and it might be instrumental to give a pragmatic message on an individual's responsibility to receive the influenza vaccine. We therefore investigated the role of specific confounders to explain the association between influenza vaccine and mortality among older adults. METHODS: Using a primary care database, we formed a cohort of patients aged 65 years or older who were actively registered with their general practitioner (GP) at the beginning of each of nine influenza seasons through to the 2018/2019 season. The study index date was the related seasons' starting date. Exposure to the influenza vaccine was operationally defined in the 2 months preceding the index date up to 2 weeks before the exit date. Cox regression models were estimated to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) of death between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in a time-dependent fashion. The potential confounders sequentially entered the model based on their increasing effect size observed in univariate analyses. RESULTS: Over the 10 years under study, the influenza vaccine showed a significant protective effect in terms of mortality, reaching 13% reduction (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95) in the 2018/2019 influenza season. When we estimated the multivariate model by sequentially adding the potential confounders, there was an inversion of HR (below the unit) that was significantly explained by the covariates coding for a prior history of lower respiratory tract infections and the presence of the pneumococcal vaccine. CONCLUSION: In the current pandemic scenario, we cannot divert attention to proper use of face masks, social distancing, and hand hygiene, which are important measures to prevent influenza and other respiratory viral infections. Nonetheless, their effectiveness might be negligible without acceptable coverage for influenza vaccine, especially in older patients with a history of lower respiratory tract infections, which appears to be the main source of confounding by indication.

TElewoRk-RelAted Stress (TERRA), Psychological and Physical Strain of Working From Home During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Many workers shifted to working from home due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This review aims to investigate if this sudden change caused an increase in TElewoRk-RelAted stress (TERRA) which is defined as physical and mental stress caused by telework. METHODS: A systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was performed of three scientific databases (PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus), which also included a quality assessment. Articles measuring stress, psychological or physical, in remote workers, published from December 2019 through August 2021 were included in the review. Results were extracted by reporting: authors, country, study design, type of workers, sample, questionnaires and measurements, and outcomes. Data were synthesized quantitatively for country, type of workers, and outcomes. RESULTS: Out of the 518 articles found in the three databases, 19 articles were included in the systematic review (10,012 participants overall), and 78.9% of these highlighted an increase in TERRA levels in remote workers. Among 85.7% of the studies considering gender as a variable, TERRA levels were higher in female workers. Twelve (63.2%) of the studies investigated psychological well-being, two (10.5%) focused on the physical well-being of remote workers, three (15.8%) investigated both, and two studies had other outcomes (10.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the redefinition of workplaces dictated by the COVID-19 pandemic, this review highlights the emerging issue of remote work and the use of technology in working from home, emphasizing a rapidly growing occupational health problem. Remote workers need to be provided with emotional and technical support to prevent TERRA in remote workers.

Psychological and Mental Sequelae in Elite Athletes with Previous SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Systematic Review.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many athletes from several sporting disciplines were infected with the SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current scientific evidence on the psychological sequelae and mental health of elite athletes who have been infected by the virus. The review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement; three databases were searched: PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus. The initial search resulted in 2420 studies; after duplicate removal and screening by title and abstract, 41 articles were screened by full-text. A total of four eligible articles were included in the review. All included articles measured depression and anxiety in athletes who had suffered from COVID-19, while in three papers levels of stress were measured. Overall, the only two questionnaires used in more than one study were the DASS-21 and the APSQ. In our systematic review, we highlighted that mental and psychological health in elite athletes has the same importance as physical health. This statement suggests that these examinations should be introduced and performed during the competitive sports' medical examinations conducted at the start of the sporting season, which currently consists only of the examination of physical parameters. Due to lack of studies on the topic, the results of our review show that mental health in athletes with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection is an issue that requires more investigation, considering the evidence of clinical consequences. The importance of post-infection psychological sequelae is significant in assessing possible repercussions on the athletes' sporting performance.

Post-Acute COVID-19 Sequelae in a Working Population at One Year Follow-Up: A Wide Range of Impacts from an Italian Sample.

Long COVID-19 is a term used to describe the symptomatic sequelae that develop after suffering from COVID-19. Very few studies have investigated the impact of COVID-19 sequelae on employment status. The aim of this research was to characterise sequelae of COVID-19 in a population of workers who tested positive for COVID-19, with a follow-up within one year of the acute illness, and to analyse the possible association between this and changes in the workers' occupational status. In this retrospective cohort study, a questionnaire was administered to 155 workers; descriptive, univariate (chi-square tests), and multivariate (logistic regression model) analyses were carried out. The mean age was 46.48 years (SD ± 7.302); 76 participants were males (49.7%), and 33 participants reported being current smokers (21.3%). Overall, 19.0% of patients reported not feeling fully recovered at follow-up, and 13.7% reported a change in their job status after COVID-19. A change in occupational status was associated with being a smoker (OR 4.106, CI [1.406-11.990], p = 0.010); hospital stay was associated with age > 46 years in a statistically significant way (p = 0.025) and with not feeling fully recovered at follow-up (p = 0.003). A persistent worsening in anxiety was more common in women (p = 0.028). This study identifies smoking as a risk factor for workers not able to resume their job; furthermore, occupational physicians should monitor mental health more closely after COVID-19, particularly in female workers.

Returning to work and the impact of post COVID-19 condition: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is still ongoing, with rapidly increasing cases all over the world, and the emerging issue of post COVID-19 (or Long COVID-19) condition is impacting the occupational world. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the impact of lasting COVID-19 symptoms or disability on the working population upon their return to employment. METHODS: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statements we performed a systematic review in December 2021, screening three databases (PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus), for articles investigating return to work in patients that were previously hospitalized due to COVID-19. A hand-searched was then performed through the references of the included systematic review. A quality assessment was performed on the included studies. RESULTS: Out of the 263 articles found through the initial search, 11 studies were included in this systematic review. The selected studies were divided based on follow-up time, in two months follow-up, follow-up between two and six months, and six months follow-up. All the studies highlighted an important impact of post COVID-19 condition in returning to work after being hospitalized, with differences based on follow-up time, home Country and mean/median age of the sample considered. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlighted post COVID-19 condition as a rising problem in occupational medicine, with consequences on workers' quality of life and productivity. The role of occupational physicians could be essential in applying limitations to work duties or hours and facilitating the return to employment in workers with a post COVID-19 condition.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Medical Liability: An International Perspective in 18 Countries.

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.

Buffering the Effects of Burnout on Healthcare Professionals' Health-The Mediating Role of Compassionate Relationships at Work in the COVID Era.

Managing the COVID-19 pandemic posed several challenges for healthcare professionals, which likely heightened their risk of burnout (Amanullah and Ramesh Shankar, 2020) and, consequently, their general physical and mental health. Although it may not be possible to address and eliminate the causes of burnout, current research informs healthcare organizations about protective strategies to reduce its detrimental consequences. The promotion of compassionate interactions among healthcare professionals may play such a role. Compassion within healthcare organizations positively affects individual performance and well-being. Building on these considerations and within the framework of the Conservation of Resources theory, this study explores the relationships among burnout dimensions, received compassion at work, and general health in 711 Italian healthcare professionals (68.5% female), aged between 21 and 73 years (Mage = 36.4, SD = 11.2). Analyses were conducted to investigate the association between burnout and general well-being (H1) and between burnout symptoms and perceived compassion at work (H2); and the mediational role of compassion in the relationship between burnout symptoms and general well-being. H1 and H2 were confirmed (r < 0.01 for both), and a SEM model showed the mediating role of compassion at work in the association between burnout symptoms and general well-being (RMSEA < 0.08, SRMR < 0.08, CFI and TLI > 0.90). Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed in the paper.

Medical Liability of the Vaccinating Doctor: Comparing Policies in European Union Countries during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic exhausted healthcare systems around the world, including European Union countries, with healthcare workers at the frontline. Therefore, new health laws and policies have been introduced at the national level in order to offer greater legal protection for health workers. Since the introduction of COVID-19 vaccination, it has led to the development of specific laws to define the compulsoriness for particular categories. This review aimed to evaluate the system of medical liability, focusing on the ten countries of the European Union with the highest rate of vaccination coverage against SARS-CoV-2. A country-by-country analysis was conducted on the different medical liability systems of individual professionals, in general, and with specific focus on the vaccinating doctors. Additional search was conducted to investigate which European states have introduced specific policies in this field, to identify the implementation of any new laws alongside the COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, and to assess which countries have adopted the European Digital COVID Certificate and funded specific compensation programs for COVID-19 vaccination. Our results highlight an extremely fragmented European scenario; therefore, this work could be a starting point to define a common approach for medical liability and related policies in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Adverse skin reactions to personal protective equipment during COVID-19 pandemic in Italian health care workers.

To avoid exposure to SARS-COV-2, healthcare professionals must use personal protective equipment (PPE). Their use has been related to a series of adverse effects; the most frequent adverse events were headache, dyspnoea, and pressure injuries. Skin adverse effects are very common, including contact dermatitis, itching, erythema, and acneiform eruptions. The objective of this study is to evaluate the skin problems caused by personal protection equipment (PPE) in health care workers (HCWs) and to individuate eventual risk factors. From May to June 2020 a retrospective observational multi-centric study conducted by an online survey sent by email, involving 10 hospital centers, was performed. We considered as independent variables gender and age, occupational group and sector, time of utilization, type and material of PPE. We tested 3 types of PPE: gloves, bonnet, and mask for different time of utilization (<1, 1-3, 3-6, >6 h). We performed a multiple logistic regression model to correlate them with skin adverse events occurrence. Among all the 1184 participants, 292 workers reported a dermatological pathology: 45 (15.41%) had psoriasis, 54 (18.49%) eczema, 38 (13.01%) acne, 48 (16.44%) seborrheic dermatitis, and 107 (36.64%) other. In our sample previous inflammatory dermatological conditions, female sex, prolonged use of PPE were significant risk factors for developing skin related adverse events considering all the PPE considered. The use of PPE is still mandatory in the hospital setting and skin adverse reactions still represent a global problem. Although data from Europe are limited, our study highlighted the importance of the problem of PPE skin reactions in a large sample of Italian healthcare professionals.

The Dermatological Effects and Occupational Impacts of Personal Protective Equipment on a Large Sample of Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Working 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 METHODS: An 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. RESULTS: Two 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. DISCUSSION: The 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.

Public Health Regulations and Policies Dealing with Preparedness and Emergency Management: The Experience of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy.

Worldwide, the management of health emergencies requires a high degree of preparedness and resilience on the part of governments and health systems. Indeed, disasters are becoming increasingly common, with significant health, social, and economic impacts. Living in a globalized world also means that emergencies that occur in one country often have an international, in some cases global, spread: the COVID-19 pandemic is a cogent example. The key elements in emergency management are central governance, coordination, investment of resources before the emergency occurs, and preparedness to deal with it at all levels. However, several factors might condition the response to the emergency, highlighting, as for Italy, strengths and weaknesses. In this context, policies and regulation of actions to be implemented at international and national level must be up-to-date, clear, transparent and, above all, feasible and implementable. Likewise, the allocation of resources to develop adequate preparedness plans is critical. Due to COVID-19 pandemic, the European Commission proposed the temporary recovery instrument NextGenerationEU, as well as a targeted reinforcement of the European Union's long-term budget for the period 2021-2027. The pandemic highlighted that it is necessary to interrupt the continuous defunding of the health sector, allocating funds especially in prevention, training and information activities: indeed, a greater and more aware public attention on health risks and on the impacts of emergencies can help to promote virtuous changes, sharing contents and information that act as a guide for the population.

The Burden of Burnout among Healthcare Professionals of Intensive Care Units and Emergency Departments during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review.

The primary aim was to evaluate the burnout prevalence among healthcare workers (HCWs) in intensive care units (ICUs) and emergency departments (EDs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary aim was to identify factors associated with burnout in this population. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines by searching PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, and Scopus from 1 January to 24 November 2020. Studies with information about burnout prevalence/level during the pandemic regarding ICU/ED HCWs were eligible. A total of 927 records were identified. The selection resulted in 11 studies. Most studies were conducted in April/May 2020. Samples ranged from 15 to 12,596 participants. The prevalence of overall burnout ranged from 49.3% to 58%. Nurses seemed to be at higher risk. Both socio-demographic and work-related features were associated with burnout. Many pandemic-related variables were associated with burnout, e.g., shortage in resources, worry regarding COVID-19, and stigma. This review highlighted a substantial burnout prevalence among ICU/ED HCWs. However, this population has presented a high burnout prevalence for a long time, and there is not sufficient evidence to understand if such prevalence is currently increased. It also outlined modifiable factors and the need to improve emergency preparedness both from an individual and structural level.

Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Regarding Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) in a Sample of Italian Men Who Have SEX with MEN (MSM).

BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is suitable for high human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infection risk people, foremost among whom are males who have sex with other males (MSM). This study evaluated knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding PrEP in a sample of Italian MSM, in order to hypothesize strategies to implement PrEP awareness and use. No previous study has assessed this issue; Methods: An online survey was given to an opportunistic sample of Italian MSM. The questionnaire investigated sexual behaviour and habits, HIV/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) knowledge and PrEP awareness, attitudes and practices. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to identify factors associated with PrEP knowledge; Results: A total of 196 MSM participated in this survey. Overall data showed that 87.2% of participants knew what PrEP is, but only 7.5% have ever used it. The main reason for not using PrEP was the cost of the therapy (26.9%). The principal source of PrEP information was the Internet (68.4%). Being regularly tested for HIV was significantly associated with PrEP knowledge (adjusted odds ratio (AdjOR) = 3.16; confidence interval (CI) = 1.06-9.29); Conclusions: Knowledge regarding PrEP was well established, but PrEP use was not equally widespread. It is necessary to improve research on PrEP usage in order to PrEP access to be granted.

Beyond COVID-19: a cross-sectional study in Italy exploring the covid collateral impacts on healthcare services.

With COVID-19, populations are facing unmet health needs due to fear of contagion, lockdown measures and overload of Healthcare services (HCS). The COCOS study aimed to investigate reduced healthcare access among Italian citizens, additionally looking for specific subgroups that will primarily need health services in the next future. A cross-sectional online survey was performed during the Italian lockdown between April and May 2020. Descriptive, univariable and multivariable (logistic regression models) analyses were performed: results are expressed as Odd Ratios and Adjusted Odd Ratios (ORs and AdjORs). Totally, 1,515 questionnaires were collected. Median age was 42 years (IQR 23), 65.6% were females. Around 21.8% declared to suffer from chronic diseases. About 32.4% faced a delay of a scheduled Medical Service (MS) by provider decision, 13.2% refused to access scheduled MS for the fear of contagion, and 6.5% avoided HCS even if having an acute onset issue. Alarmingly, 1.5% avoided Emergency Department when in need and 5.0% took medications without consulting any physician: patients suffering from chronic conditions resulted to be more prone to self-medication (AdjOR [95% CI]: 2.16 [1.16-4.02]). This study demonstrated that indirect effects of COVID-19 are significant. Large groups of population suffered delays and interruptions of medical services, and the most vulnerable were the most affected. Immediate efforts are needed to reduce the backlog that HCSs incurred in.

Healthcare Workers' (HCWs) attitudes towards mandatory influenza vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Influenza is a disease responsible for thousands of deaths every year. Although healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a way of contagion for patients, vaccination coverage among them is low. Mandatory vaccination has been proposed, but controversies remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the acceptance of mandatory vaccination by HCWs, and to investigate associated characteristics. MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science were used to search for studies assessing the topic. PRISMA statements were followed. Of the 13,457 univocal records found, 52 studies were included in the systematic review and 40 in the meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of HCWs accepting the policy was of 61% (95% CI: 53%- 68%) but with great heterogeneity between continents (from 54% in Europe to 69% in Asia) and in different professionals (from 40% in nurses to 80% in students). Vaccinated HCWs agreed more frequently with mandatory vaccination than non-vaccinated ones. More studies that consider mandatory vaccination acceptance as the main outcome are needed, but the results of this study confirm that in some settings the majority of HCWs favour mandatory vaccination. This, combined with effects that a flu epidemic could have if overlapped to pandemics with similar symptoms, requires renewed considerations on mandatory vaccination.