Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 59(4)2023 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2303179

ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: Triage systems help provide the right care at the right time for patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs). Triage systems are generally used to subdivide patients into three to five categories according to the system used, and their performance must be carefully monitored to ensure the best care for patients. Materials and Methods: We examined ED accesses in the context of 4-level (4LT) and 5-level triage systems (5LT), implemented from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020. This study assessed the effects of a 5LT on wait times and under-triage (UT) and over-triage (OT). We also examined how 5LT and 4LT systems reflected actual patient acuity by correlating triage codes with severity codes at discharge. Other outcomes included the impact of crowding indices and 5LT system function during the COVID-19 pandemic in the study populations. Results: We evaluated 423,257 ED presentations. Visits to the ED by more fragile and seriously ill individuals increased, with a progressive increase in crowding. The length of stay (LOS), exit block, boarding, and processing times increased, reflecting a net raise in throughput and output factors, with a consequent lengthening of wait times. The decreased UT trend was observed after implementing the 5LT system. Conversely, a slight rise in OT was reported, although this did not affect the medium-high-intensity care area. Conclusions: Introducing a 5LT improved ED performance and patient care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Waiting Lists , Humans , Triage , Pandemics , Length of Stay , Emergency Service, Hospital
2.
Int J Infect Dis ; 122: 420-426, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2015419

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We compared the characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated and nonvaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19. DESIGN: We analyzed patients hospitalized in a COVID hub during three one-month periods: (i) October 15, 2020-November 15, 2020 (prevaccination peak); (ii) October 15, 2021-November 15, 2021 (Delta wave); (iii) December 15, 2021-January 15, 2022 (Omicron wave). To define the epidemiologic context, SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers was analyzed. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence in healthcare workers was 146 cases per 1000 persons in 2020 (prevaccination) and 67 in 2021 (postvaccination, when the Omicron variant caused most infections). There were 420 hospitalized patients in the prevaccination period, 51 during the Delta wave (52.1% vaccinated) and 165 during the Omicron wave (52.9% vaccinated). During the Delta wave, a significantly higher number of nonvaccinated (29.2%) than vaccinated patients (3.7%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.019). Nonvaccinated patients were younger and had a lower rate of concomitant medical conditions (53.2% vs 83.7%; p < 0.001) during the Omicron wave when 80% of patients admitted to ICU and all those who died were still infected by the Delta variant. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine effectiveness in fragile individuals appears to be lower because of a faster immunity decline. However, the Omicron variant seems to cause less severe COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(13)2022 07 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1917480

ABSTRACT

During the two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than 400 million cases all over the world have been identified. Health care workers were among the first to deal with this virus and consequently a high incidence of infection was reported in this population. The aim of the survey was to investigate health care workers' (HCWs) clinical characteristics and potential risk factors associated with the SARS-CoV-2 infection in a referral hospital in Northern Italy after the first and second waves of the pandemic. We administered a questionnaire during the flu vaccination campaign that took place at the end of 2020; among 1386 vaccinated HCWs, data was collected and analyzed for 1065 subjects. 182 HCWs (17%) declared that they had tested positive on at least a molecular or a serological test since the beginning of the pandemic. Comparing the infected vs. not infected HCWs, median age, BMI, smoking habit, presence of hypertension or other comorbidities were not significantly different, while having worked in a COVID ward was associated with the infection (ORadj = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.07-2.20). Respondents declared that more than 70% of contacts occurred in the hospital with patients or colleagues, while about 15% in domestic environments. Among the infected, the most reported symptoms were fever (62.1%), asthenia (60.3%), anosmia/ageusia (53.5%), arthralgia/myalgia (48.3%), headache or other neurological symptoms (46.6%), cough (43.1%) and flu-like syndrome (41.4%). The percentage of subjects who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 seems to be higher in HCWs than in the general population; hence, in hospitals, protective measures and preventive strategies to avoid the spreading of the contagion remain crucial.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Microorganisms ; 10(6):1250, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1894334

ABSTRACT

We compared the development and persistence of antibody and T-cell responses elicited by the mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine or SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed 37 post-COVID-19 patients (15 with pneumonia and 22 with mild symptoms) and 20 vaccinated subjects. Anti-Spike IgG and neutralising antibodies were higher in vaccinated subjects and in patients with pneumonia than in patients with mild COVID-19, and persisted at higher levels in patients with pneumonia while declining in vaccinated subjects. However, the booster dose restored the initial antibody levels. The proliferative CD4+ T-cell response was similar in vaccinated subjects and patients with pneumonia, but was lower in mild COVID-19 patients and persisted in both vaccinated subjects and post-COVID patients. Instead, the proliferative CD8+ T-cell response was lower in vaccinated subjects than in patients with pneumonia, decreased six months after vaccination, and was not restored after the booster dose. The cytokine profile was mainly TH1 in both vaccinated subjects and post-COVID-19 patients. The mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine elicited higher levels of antibody and CD4+ T-cell responses than those observed in mild COVID-19 patients. While the antibody response declined after six months and required a booster dose to be restored at the initial levels, the proliferative CD4+ T-cell response persisted over time.

5.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 6032, 2021 10 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1469967

ABSTRACT

Vaccine breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection has been monitored in 3720 healthcare workers receiving 2 doses of BNT162b2. SARS-CoV-2 infection is detected in 33 subjects, with a 100-day cumulative incidence of 0.93%. Vaccine protection against acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 infection is 83% (95%CI: 58-93%) in the overall population and 93% (95%CI: 69-99%) in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects, when compared with a non-vaccinated control group from the same Institution, in which SARS-CoV-2 infection occurs in 20/346 subjects (100-day cumulative incidence: 5.78%). The infection is symptomatic in 16 (48%) vaccinated subjects vs 17 (85%) controls (p = 0.01). All analyzed patients, in whom the amount of viral RNA was sufficient for genome sequencing, results infected by the alpha variant. Antibody and T-cell responses are not reduced in subjects with breakthrough infection. Evidence of virus transmission, determined by contact tracing, is observed in two (6.1%) cases. This real-world data support the protective effect of BNT162b2 vaccine. A triple antigenic exposure, such as two-dose vaccine schedule in experienced subjects, may confer a higher protection.


Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/diagnosis , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Antibodies, Viral/blood , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/statistics & numerical data , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Immunization Schedule , Incidence , Male , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral/genetics , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index
6.
Int J Infect Dis ; 109: 199-202, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1385715

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection induced by SARS-CoV-2 anti-S1 and anti-S2 IgG antibody positivity resulting from natural infection was evaluated. METHODS: The frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infection (as determined by virus RNA detection) was evaluated in a group of 1,460 seropositive and a control group of 8,150 seronegative healthcare workers in three Centres of Northern Italy in the period June-November 2020. Neutralizing serum titers were analyzed in seropositive subjects with or without secondary SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: During the 6-month survey, 1.78% seropositive subjects developed secondary SARS-CoV-2 infection while 6.63% seronegative controls developed primary infection (odds ratio: 0.26; 95% confidence interval: 0.17-0.38). Secondary infection was associated with low or absent serum neutralizing titer (p<0.01) and was mildly symptomatic in 45.8% cases vs 71.4% symptomatic primary infections (odds ratio: 0.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.16-0.78). CONCLUSIONS: Immunity from natural infection appears protective from secondary infection; therefore, vaccination of seronegative subjects might be prioritized.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfection , Antibodies, Viral , Health Personnel , Humans , Incidence , Italy/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
7.
West J Emerg Med ; 22(4): 860-870, 2021 Jul 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1328240

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare patterns change during disease outbreaks and pandemics. Identification of modified patterns is important for future preparedness and response. Emergency department (ED) crowding can occur because of the volume of patients waiting to be seen, which results in delays in patient assessment or treatment and impediments to leaving the ED once treatment is complete. Therefore, ED crowding has become a growing problem worldwide and represents a serious barrier to healthcare operations. METHODS: This observational study was based on a retrospective review of the epidemiologic and clinical records of patients who presented to the Foundation IRCCS Policlinic San Matteo in Pavia, Italy, during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak (February 21-May 1, 2020, pandemic group). The methods involved an estimation of the changes in epidemiologic and clinical data from the annual baseline data after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We identified reduced ED visits (180 per day in the control period vs 96 per day in the pandemic period; P < 0.001) during the COVID-19 pandemic, irrespective of age and gender, especially for low-acuity conditions. However, patients who did present to the ED were more likely to be hemodynamically unstable, exhibit abnormal vital signs, and more frequently required high-intensity care and hospitalization. During the pandemic, ED crowding dramatically increased primarily because of an increased number of visits by patients with high-acuity conditions, changes in patient management that prolonged length of stay, and increased rates of boarding, which led to the inability of patients to gain access to appropriate hospital beds within a reasonable amount of time. During the pandemic, all crowding output indices increased, especially the rates of boarding (36% vs 57%; P < 0.001), "access block" (24% vs 47%; P < 0.001), mean boarding time (640 vs 1,150 minutes [min]; P 0.001), mean "access block" time (718 vs 1,223 min; P < 0.001), and "access block" total time (650,379 vs 1,359,172 min; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Crowding in the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic was due to the inability to access hospital beds. Therefore, solutions to this lack of access are required to prevent a recurrence of crowding due to a new viral wave or epidemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Crowding , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hospitalization , Humans
8.
Intern Emerg Med ; 17(2): 503-514, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261815

ABSTRACT

The geriatric population constitutes a large slice of the population of Western countries and a class of fragile patients, with greater deaths due to COVID-19. The patterns of healthcare utilization change during pandemic disease outbreaks. Identifying the patterns of changes of this particular fragile subpopulation is important for future preparedness and response. Overcrowding in the emergency department (ED) can occur because of the volume of patients waiting to be seen, delays in patient assessment or treatment in the ED, or impediments to leaving the ED once the treatment has been completed. Overcrowding has become a serious and growing issue globally, which represents a serious impediment to healthcare utilization. To estimate the rate of ED visits attributable to the outbreak and guide the planning of strategies for managing ED access or after the outbreak of transmittable respiratory diseases. This observational study was based on a retrospective review of the epidemiological and clinical records of patients aged > 75 years who visited the Foundation IRCCS Policlinic San Matteo during the first wave of COVID-19 outbreak (February 21 to May 1, 2020; pandemic group). The analysis methods included estimation of the changes in the epidemiological and clinical data from the annual baseline data after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcome measures and analysis: Primary objective is the evaluation of ED admission rate change and ED overcrowding. Secondary objectives are the evaluation of modes of ED access by reason and triage code, access types, clinical outcomes (such as admission and mortality rates). During the pandemic, ED crowding increased dramatically, although the overall number of patients decreased, in the face of a percentage increase in those with high-acuity conditions, because of changes in patient management that have prolonged length of stay (LOS) and increased rates of access block. Overcrowding during the COVID-19 pandemic can be attributed to the Access Block. Access Block solutions are hence required to prevent a recurrence of crowding to any new viral wave or new epidemic in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Crowding , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Length of Stay , Pandemics , Patient Acceptance of Health Care
9.
J Public Health (Oxf) ; 43(1): 26-34, 2021 04 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-900472

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the health care workers (HCWs) at the frontline have been largely exposed to infected patients, running a high risk of being infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.Since limiting transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in health care setting is crucial to avoid the community spread of SARS-CoV-2, we want to share our experience as an early hit hospital where standard infection control practices have been conscientiously applied and effective. We believe that our example, as first and hardest hit country, might be a warning and aid not only for those who have been hit later, but also for a second fearful wave of contagion. In addition, we want to offer an insight on modifiable risk factors for HWs-related infection. METHODS: Demographic, lifestyle, work-related and comorbidities data of 1447 HCWs, which underwent a nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2, were retrospectively collected. For the 164 HCWs positive for SARS-CoV-2, data about safety in the workplace, symptoms and clinical course of COVID-19 were also collected. Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was estimated. Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection were assessed using a multivariable Poisson regression. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among the screened HCWs was 11.33% (9.72-13.21). Working in a COVID-19 ward, being a former smoker (versus being a person who never smoked) and BMI was positively associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereas being a current smoker was negatively associated with this variable. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming an equal accessibility and proper use of personal protective equipment of all the HCWs of our Hospital, the great and more prolonged contact with COVID-19 patients remains the crucial risk factor for SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, increased and particular care needs to be focused specifically on the most exposed HCWs groups, which should be safeguarded. Furthermore, in order to limit the risk of asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the HCWs mild symptoms of COVID-19 should be considered when evaluating the potential benefits of universal staff testing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Personnel, Hospital , Adult , Body Mass Index , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Female , Humans , Incidence , Infection Control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Smoking
10.
Acta Biomed ; 91(11-S): e2020004, 2020 09 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-809554

ABSTRACT

Italy is one of the most exposed countries worldwide to COVID-19, and Lombardy is the most affected region in Italy. In this context, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo in Pavia, one of the largest University hospitals in the region, has been involved in the management of the outbreak since its inception. Immediately after the communication of the first Italian COVID-19+ patient, the Pediatric Unit has been completely reorganized to face the approaching outbreak. The optimization of the Pediatric Unit resources for COVID-19 emergency is reported as an example to safely preserve health activity during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Management , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Intensive Care Units, Pediatric/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Child , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Intern Emerg Med ; 15(5): 825-833, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-548983

ABSTRACT

Since December 2019, the world has been facing the life-threatening disease, named Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), recognized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization. The response of the Emergency Medicine network, integrating "out-of-hospital" and "hospital" activation, is crucial whenever the health system has to face a medical emergency, being caused by natural or human-derived disasters as well as by a rapidly spreading epidemic outbreak. We here report the Pavia Emergency Medicine network response to the COVID-19 outbreak. The "out-of-hospital" response was analysed in terms of calls, rescues and missions, whereas the "hospital" response was detailed as number of admitted patients and subsequent hospitalisation or discharge. The data in the first 5 weeks of the Covid-19 outbreak (February 21-March 26, 2020) were compared with a reference time window referring to the previous 5 weeks (January 17-February 20, 2020) and with the corresponding historical average data from the previous 5 years (February 21-March 26). Since February 21, 2020, a sudden and sustained increase in the calls to the AREU 112 system was noted (+ 440%). After 5 weeks, the number of calls and missions was still higher as compared to both the reference pre-Covid-19 period (+ 48% and + 10%, respectively) and the historical control (+ 53% and + 22%, respectively). Owing to the overflow from the neighbouring hospitals, which rapidly became overwhelmed and had to temporarily close patient access, the population served by the Pavia system more than doubled (from 547.251 to 1.135.977 inhabitants, + 108%). To minimize the possibility of intra-hospital spreading of the infection, a separate "Emergency Department-Infective Disease" was created, which evaluated 1241 patients with suspected infection (38% of total ED admissions). Out of these 1241 patients, 58.0% (n = 720) were admitted in general wards (n = 629) or intensive care unit (n = 91). To allow this massive number of admissions, the hospital reshaped many general ward Units, which became Covid-19 Units (up to 270 beds) and increased the intensive care unit beds from 32 to 60. In the setting of a long-standing continuing emergency like the present Covid-19 outbreak, the integration, interaction and team work of the "out-of-hospital" and "in-hospital" systems have a pivotal role. The present study reports how the rapid and coordinated reorganization of both might help in facing such a disaster. AREU-112 and the Emergency Department should be ready to finely tune their usual cooperation to respond to a sudden and overwhelming increase in the healthcare needs brought about by a pandemia like the current one. This lesson should shape and reinforce the future.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Emergency Medical Services/organization & administration , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Italy/epidemiology , Pandemics , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL