Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 25
Filter
1.
Front Pharmacol ; 13: 825479, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1785391

ABSTRACT

Background: Evidence-based recommendations for outpatient management of COVID-19 were published by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) to limit the use of off-label treatments. The aim of this study is to measure the use of outpatient drug treatments in a COVID-19-positive population, taking into account the Italian regulatory agency's advices. Methods: A descriptive observational study was conducted. All patients testing positive for COVID-19 residing in Lazio region, Italy, with diagnosis date between March 2020 and May 2021 were selected, and outpatient medicine prescription patterns were identified. Results: Independent of AIFA recommendations, the use of drug therapy in the management of outpatient COVID-19 cases was frequent (about one-third of the cases). The most used drug therapy was antibiotics, specifically azithromycin, despite the negative recommendation of AIFA, while the use of corticosteroids increased after the positive recommendation of regulatory agency for the use in subjects with severe COVID-19 disease. The use of hydroxychloroquine was limited to the early pandemic period where evidence on its potential benefit was controversial. Antithrombotics were widely used in outpatient settings, even if their use was recommended for hospitalized patients. Conclusion: In this study, we show a frequent use of drug therapy in the management of outpatient cases of COVID-19, mainly attributable to antibiotics use. Our research highlights the discrepancy between recommendations for care and clinical practice and the need for strategies to bridge gaps in evidence-informed decision-making.

2.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ; 19(8):4704, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1785710

ABSTRACT

This study compares surgery volumes for fractures of the neck of the femur (FNF) and hip replacements during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with previous years. Historical (2018–2019) and pandemic (2020–2021) surgery rates for FNF and hip replacement in Lazio, adjusted for age and gender, were calculated per period and compared with a Poisson regression model. For hip replacement surgery, a comparison of different types of hospitals was also made. Before COVID-19's spread, no difference was found in the volume of surgery of both interventions. From the lockdown to the end of 2021, a decrease in surgery volumes for FNF with stabilization between summer 2020 and summer 2021, as well as an additional decline beginning at the start of Omicron's spread, were found. Hip replacement surgeries showed a greater decline during the lockdown period and increased during summer 2020 and during the Delta wave period. The increment in hip replacements, mainly observed in 2021, is due to private and religious hospitals. These results highlight that the pandemic emergency, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has had an important indirect effect on the population's health assistance in the field of orthopedics.

3.
Epidemiol Prev ; 46(1-2): 59-67, 2022.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1771981

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: to estimate the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on total and cause-specific mortality in people residing and dead in the Municipality of Rome (Italy) in 2020, and to describe the causes of death of subjects with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by molecular test. DESIGN: descriptive analysis of total and cause-specific mortality in 2020 in Rome and comparison with a reference period (2015-2018 for total mortality and 2018 for cause-specific mortality); descriptive analysis of cause-specific mortality in the cohort of SARS-CoV-2 infected subjects. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 27,471 deaths registered in the Lazio mortality-cause Registry, relating to people residing and died in the municipality of Rome in 2020, 2,374 of which died from COVID-19.MAIN OUCOME MEASURES: all-cause mortality by month, gender, age group and place of death, cause-specific mortality (ICD-10 codes). RESULTS: in the municipality of Rome in 2020, an excess of mortality from all causes equal to +10% was observed, with a greater increase in the months of October-December (+27%, +56%, and +26%, respectively) in people aged 50+, with the greatest contribution from the oldest age groups (80+) who died in the nursing homes or at home. Lower mortality was observed in the age groups 0-29 years (-30%) and 40-49 years (-13%). In 2020, COVID-19 represents the fourth cause of death in Rome after malignant tumours, diseases of the circulatory system, and respiratory diseases. Excess mortality was observed from stroke and pneumonia (both in men and women), from respiratory diseases (in men), from diabetes, mental disorders, dementia and Parkinson's disease (in women). On the contrary, mortality is lower for all cancers, for diseases of the blood and haematopoietic organs and for the causes of the circulatory system. The follow-up analysis of SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects residing in Rome shows that a share of deaths (about 20%) reports other causes of death such as cardiovascular diseases, malignant tumours, and diseases of the respiratory system on the certificate collected by the Italian National Statistics Institute. CONCLUSIONS: the 2020 mortality study highlighted excesses for acute and chronic pathologies, indicative of possible delays in the diagnosis or treatment of conditions indirectly caused by the pandemic, but also a share of misclassification of the cause of death that is recognized as COVID-19 death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Cause of Death , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Rome/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
4.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(3)2022 Feb 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1726062

ABSTRACT

Several studies reported socioeconomic inequalities during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed at investigating educational inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination on 22 December 2021. We used the cohort of all residents in the Lazio Region, Central Italy, established at the beginning of the pandemic to investigate the effects of COVID-19. The Lazio Region has 5.5 million residents, mostly distributed in the Metropolitan Area of Rome (4.3 million inhabitants). We selected those aged 35 years or more who were alive and still residents on 22 December 2021. The cohort included data on sociodemographic, health characteristics, COVID-19 vaccination (none, partial, or complete), and SARS-CoV-2 infection. We used adjusted logistic regression models to analyze the association between level of education and no vaccination. We investigated 3,186,728 subjects (54% women). By the end of 2021, 88.1% of the population was fully vaccinated, and 10.3% were not vaccinated. There were strong socioeconomic inequalities in not getting vaccinated: compared with those with a university degree, residents with a high school degree had an odds ratio (OR) of 1.29 (95% confidence interval, CI, 1.27-1.30), and subjects with a junior high or primary school attainment had an OR = 1.41 (95% CI: 1.40-1.43). Since a comprehensive vaccination against COVID-19 could help reduce socioeconomic inequalities raised with the pandemic, further efforts in reaching the low socioeconomic strata of the population are crucial.

5.
J Clin Med ; 11(3)2022 Feb 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1674685

ABSTRACT

Evidence on social determinants of health on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and adverse outcomes is still limited. Therefore, this work investigates educational disparities in the incidence of infection and mortality within 30 days of the onset of infection during 2020 in Rome, with particular attention to changes in socioeconomic inequalities over time. A cohort of 1,538,231 residents in Rome on 1 January 2020, aged 35+, followed from 1 March to 31 December 2020, were considered. Cumulative incidence and mortality rates by education were estimated. Multivariable log-binomial and Cox regression models were used to investigate educational disparities in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality during the entire study period and in three phases of the pandemic. During 2020, there were 47,736 incident cases and 2281 deaths. The association between education and the incidence of infection changed over time. Till May 2020, low- and medium-educated individuals had a lower risk of infection than that of the highly educated. However, there was no evidence of an association between education and the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the summer. Lastly, low-educated adults had a 25% higher risk of infection from September to December than that of the highly educated. Similarly, there was substantial evidence of educational inequalities in mortality within 30 days of the onset of infection in the last term of 2020. In Rome, social inequalities in COVID-19 appeared in the last term of 2020, and they strengthen the need for monitoring inequalities emerging from this pandemic.

6.
J Clin Med ; 10(24)2021 Dec 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1572524

ABSTRACT

Patients with end-stage kidney disease represent a frail population and might be at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Lazio Regional Dialysis and Transplant Registry collected information on dialysis patients with a positive swab. The study investigated incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, mortality and their potential associated factors in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) in the Lazio region. Method: The occurrence of infection was assessed among MHD patients included in the RRDTL from 1 March to 30 November 2020. The adjusted cumulative incidence of infection and mortality risk within 30 days of infection onset were estimated. Logistic and Cox regression models were applied to identify factors associated with infection and mortality, respectively. Results: The MHD cohort counted 4942 patients; 256 (5.2%) had COVID-19. The adjusted cumulative incidence was 5.1%. Factors associated with infection included: being born abroad, educational level, cystic renal disease/familial nephropathy, vascular disease and being treated in a dialysis center located in Local Health Authority (LHA) Rome 2. Among infected patients, 59 (23.0%) died within 30 days; the adjusted mortality risk was 21.0%. Factors associated with 30-day mortality included: age, malnutrition and fever at the time of swab. Conclusions: Factors associated with infection seem to reflect socioeconomic conditions. Factors associated with mortality, in addition to age, are related to clinical characteristics and symptoms at the time of swab.

7.
Front Pharmacol ; 12: 749514, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502332

ABSTRACT

Background: Standard of Care (SoC) has been used with different significance across Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) on the treatment of Covid-19. In the context of a living systematic review on pharmacological interventions for COVID-19, we assessed the characteristics of the SoC adopted in the published RCTs. Methods: We performed a systematic review searching Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Covid-19 register, international trial registers, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv up to April 10, 2021. We included all RCTs comparing any pharmacological intervention for Covid-19 against any drugs, placebo, or SoC. All trials selected have been classified as studies with SoC including treatments under investigation for COVID-19 (SoC+); studies with SoC without specifications regarding the potential therapies allowed (SoC-); studies including as control groups Placebo (P) or active controls (A+). Results: We included in our analysis 144 RCTs, comprising 78,319 patients. Most of these trials included SoC (108; 75.0%); some in all arms of the study (69.7%) or just as independent comparators (30.3%). Treatments under investigation for COVID-19 in other trials were included in the SoC (SoC+) in 67 cases (62.0%), Thirty-one different therapeutic agents (alone or in combination) were counted within the studies with SoC+: mostly hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine (28), lopinavir/ritonavir (20) or azithromycin (16). No specification was given regarding treatment allowed in the control groups (SoC-) in 41 studies (38.0%). Conclusion: Our analysis shows that the findings emerging from several clinical trials regarding the efficacy and safety of pharmacological intervention for COVID-19 might be jeopardized by the quality of control arms.

9.
Eur J Neurol ; 28(10): 3403-3410, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1297617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex chronic, autoimmune inflammatory disease involving multidisciplinary assessments and interventions. Access to outpatient specialist and home healthcare services was explored during the pandemic outbreak and the lockdown amongst MS patients in the Lazio region. Adherence to disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) is also described. METHODS: A population-based study was conducted using regional healthcare administrative databases. A validated algorithm was used to identify MS cases over the period 2011-2018. The numbers of specialist and home-based services were compared between 2019 and 2020. The medication possession ratio was used to measure adherence to DMTs. RESULTS: A total of 9380 MS patients were identified (68% women). A decline in the number of outpatient care services between March and June 2020 compared to the previous year was observed, in particular for rehabilitation (-82%), magnetic resonance imaging (-56%) and neurological specialist services (-91%). Important year-to-year variations were observed in May and June 2020 in home-based nursing and medical care (-91%) and motor re-education services (-74%). Adherence to DMTs was higher in the first 4 months of 2019 compared to the same period of 2020 (67.1% vs. 57.0%). CONCLUSIONS: A notable disruption of rehabilitative therapy and home-based services as well as in DMT adherence was observed. Since the pandemic is still ongoing and interruption of healthcare services could have a major impact on MS patients, it is necessary to monitor access of MS patients to healthcare resources in order to ensure adequate treatments, including rehabilitative therapies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Multiple Sclerosis , Communicable Disease Control , Delivery of Health Care , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Multiple Sclerosis/drug therapy , Multiple Sclerosis/epidemiology , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
10.
J Clin Med ; 10(11)2021 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1256585

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Since the beginning of the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-CoV-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been a serious challenge for immune-compromised patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 in terms of risks of infection, hospitalization and mortality in a cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis (PSO) or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Furthermore, we studied the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on the prescribed drug regimen in these patients. METHODS: Through the record linkage between health information systems, a cohort of patients, ≥18 years old, assisted in the Lazio region and who had suffered from immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (RA, PSO, IBD) between 2007 and 2019, was identified. The risk of infection, hospitalization or mortality for COVID-19, was assessed by logistic regression models, and reported in an Odds Ratio (ORs; CI 95%), adjusting for sex, age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index. We also estimated these risks separately by IMID and in the subgroup of prevalent biologic drug users. We investigated deferral of biological treatments in the study population by comparing the prevalence of weekly use of biologicals (2019-2020) before and during the pandemic periods. FINDINGS: Within the 65,230 patients with IMIDs, the cumulative incidence for COVID-19 was 303/10,000 ab. In this cohort of patients, we observed a significantly higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than the general population: OR = 1.17 (95% CI 1.12-1.22). The risk was higher even considering separately each disease and in the subgroup of prevalent biologic drug users. This last subgroup of patients showed a higher risk of death related to COVID-19 (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.04-3.33) than the general population. However, no differences in terms of risks of hospitalization or death related to COVID-19 were recorded in patients with the IMIDs. Comparing the 2019-2020 prevalence of weekly biological drug treatments in prevalent biologic drug users, we found a decrease (-19.6%) during the lockdown, probably due to pandemic restrictions. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients with IMIDs seem to have a higher risk of SARS-CoV2 infection. However, other than for patients with prevalent biologic drug treatment, no significant differences in terms of hospitalization and mortality were reported compared to the general populations; further investigation is warranted on account of unmeasured confounding. In addition, during the lockdown period, the COVID-19 emergency highlighted a lower use of biologic drugs; this phenomenon requires strict pharmacological monitoring as it could be a proxy of forthcoming long-term clinical progression.

11.
Front Pharmacol ; 12: 649472, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1236739

ABSTRACT

Background: Several pharmacological interventions are now under investigation for the treatment of Covid-19, and the evidence is evolving rapidly. Our aim is to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of these drugs. Methods and Findings: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis searching Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Covid-19 register, international trial registers, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv up to December 10, 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any pharmacological intervention for Covid-19 against any drugs, placebo or standard care (SC). Data extracted from published reports were assessed for risk of bias in accordance with the Cochrane tool, and using the GRADE framework. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). We estimated summary risk ratio (RR) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects (Prospero, number CRD42020176914). We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis searching Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Covid-19 register, international trial registers, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv up to December 10, 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any pharmacological intervention for Covid-19 against any drugs, placebo or standard care (SC). Data extracted from published reports were assessed for risk of bias in accordance with the Cochrane tool, and using the GRADE framework. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). We estimated summary risk ratio (RR) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects (Prospero, number CRD42020176914). We included 96 RCTs, comprising of 34,501 patients. The network meta-analysis showed in terms of all-cause mortality, when compared to SC or placebo, only corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate (RR 0.90, 95%CI 0.83, 0.97; moderate certainty of evidence). Corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate also when compared to hydroxychloroquine (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.74, 0.94; moderate certainty of evidence). Remdesivir proved to be better in terms of SAEs when compared to SC or placebo (RR 0.75, 95%CI 0.63, 0.89; high certainty of evidence) and plasma (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.34, 0.94; high certainty of evidence). The combination of lopinavir and ritonavir proved to reduce SAEs when compared to plasma (RR 0.49, 95%CI 0.25, 0.95; high certainty of evidence). Most of the RCTs were at unclear risk of bias (42 of 96), one third were at high risk of bias (34 of 96) and 20 were at low risk of bias. Certainty of evidence ranged from high to very low. Conclusion: At present, corticosteroids reduced all-cause mortality in patients with Covid-19, with a moderate certainty of evidence. Remdesivir appeared to be a safer option than SC or placebo, while plasma was associated with safety concerns. These preliminary evidence-based observations should guide clinical practice until more data are made public.

12.
Recenti Prog Med ; 112(5): 51e-67e, 2021 05.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232493

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the first semester 2020 almost all country implemented rigid measures of social distances, including schools closure, to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Up to now, however, the efficacy of school closure to reduce the spread of the disease in the community still remain unclear and no much is known about the potential negative effects of such measures on physical health and psychological wellbeing of children and adolescents, mainly if protracted for long periods. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the most relevant data of a systematic review on the impact of the 2020 school closure and social distances measures implemented in response to covid-19 pandemic on youths physical health and psychological wellbeing. In the present paper we describe the review's methodology and the characteristics and methodological quality of the retrieved studies. METHODS: We searched on 11 international databases up to 1st September 2020 to retrieve cohort studies, cross sectional surveys, uncontrolled pre-post studies and modelling studies. Methodological quality of included studies has been assessed with validated checklists. RESULTS: Sixty-four studies have been included; 42 assessed the effect of social distances measure of physical health and 27 on psychological wellbeing. All the studies have been conducted during the first wave of pandemic and assessed the short-term effect of social distances measures implemented for relatively short periods. The 32.4% of the studies has been conducted in the UK, 20.3% in Italy, 12.5% in China, 10.9% in developing countries and 9.4% in the US. 37.5% of the studies were cohort studies, 40.6% cross sectional surveys, 19.7% uncontrolled studies and 1 was a modeling study. 59.6% of the studies has been rated as high quality. The most important weakness of the cross-sectional surveys and uncontrolled studies was the scarce representativeness of the sample while 96% of the cohort studies were judged as high quality. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of acceptable quality studies have been published during the first months of pandemic to assess the impact of school closure and social distances measures on physical health and psychological wellbeing of youths. This highlights the relevance of the topic and the need to assess carefully the balance between harms and benefits of such measures in terms of actual reduction of transmission and youths' psychological and physical harms. Further studies are needed on the long-term effect of social distances measures extended over long periods.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Status , Mental Health , Physical Distancing , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Pandemics , Quarantine , Schools
13.
Recenti Prog Med ; 112(5): 360-370, 2021 05.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232490

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the first semester 2020 almost all country implemented rigid measures of social distances, including schools closure, to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Up to now, however, the efficacy of school closure to reduce the spread of the disease in the community still remains unclear and no much is known about the potential negative effects of such measures on physical health and psychological wellbeing of youths, mainly if protracted for long periods. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the data of a systematic review on the impact of the 2020 school closure and social distances measures implemented in response to covid-19 pandemic on youths' physical health and psychological wellbeing. In the present paper we describe the impact on psychological wellbeing. METHODS: We searched 11 international databases up to 1st September 2020 to retrieve cohort studies, cross sectional surveys, uncontrolled pre-post studies and modelling studies. Methodological quality of included studies has been assessed with validated checklists. RESULTS: Sixty-four studies have been included; 27 assessed the impact on psychological wellbeing. All the studies have been conducted during the first wave of pandemic and assessed the short-term effect of social distances measures implemented for relatively short periods. The majority of the studies were conducted in the UK (37,6%) and China (27%). The 42.3% has been judged of high methodological quality. Two studies reported an increase of suicides, while two studies reported a reduction of the access to Psychiatric Emergency Department, Maltreatment allegations decreased substantially, likely due to a reduction in reports rather than actual incidence. Prevalence of anxiety among adolescents ranged between 19% and 64%, depression between 22.3% and 43.7%. Among children 5-12 years old, prevalence of anxiety varied between 19% and 78%, while depression between 6.3% and 22.6%. Among pre-school children, some studies found worsening of behavioural and emotional problems while others did not. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the studies reported relevant worsening of the psychological wellbeing, mainly among adolescents. If school closure and rigid social distances measures will extend for a long time, an even more pronounced negative effect can be expected. Further studies are needed on the long-term effect of prolonged social distances measures, as well as a careful harm-benefit analysis of the impact of such measures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Mental Health , Pandemics , Physical Distancing , Adolescent , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child Behavior Disorders/epidemiology , Child, Preschool , Depression/epidemiology , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant , Mental Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Physical Abuse/statistics & numerical data , Prevalence , Psychology, Adolescent , Psychology, Child , Quarantine , Schools , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Suicide/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , Young Adult
14.
Recenti Prog Med ; 112(5): 347-359, 2021 05.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232489

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Schools' closure during covid-19 pandemic implemented almost all over the world, together with social distances measures and lockdown to reduce transmission, could have had negative impact on youths' health. AIM: Summarize the most relevant data from a literature systematic review on the impact on youths' physical health of the 2020 school closure and social distances measures implemented in response to covid-19 pandemic. METHODS: Authors of the original review searched on 11 international databases up to 1st September 2020 to retrieve cohort studies, cross sectional surveys, uncontrolled pre-post studies and modelling studies. Methodological quality has been assessed with validated checklists. RESULTS: Forty-two studies reporting the impact on physical health have been finally included. They have been conducted in 14 countries, most of which in Italy (30.9%) and UK (30.9%). The majority were cohort studies (40.5%) and the overall methodological quality, irrespective of study designs, was high for the 71.4% of the studies. Twenty-seven studies assessed the impact on health services utilization, whose results showed a relevant reduction of Emergency Departments accesses (64%-89.3%) and hospital admissions (31%-85%); however, an increase of acute cases was observed together with delayed admission. An important reduction of vaccine services utilization was also noted during the first period of lockdown. Domestic accidents and head trauma for suspected domestic violence increased. Health related behaviours worsened, with a relevant increase of screen time (mean of 2.9 hours to 5.1 hours), an important reduction of physical activity (up to 64%). Finally, sleep problems and increase of food consumption, particularly the unhealthy food were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Relevant negative effects of school closure and social distances measures have observed. All the studies have been conducted during the first wave of pandemic and assessed the short-term effect of closures implemented for relatively short periods. If school closure and rigid social distances measures imposition will extend for a long time, an even more pronounced negative effect can be expected. In the context of health policies, in addition to the potential benefits of school closures and social distancing measures on the containment of infection, the potential damage on the physical health of young people should be taken into account by implementing policies to safeguard their health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Services Accessibility , Health Status , Pandemics , Physical Distancing , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Eating , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Exercise , Humans , Infant , Quarantine , Schools , Sedentary Behavior , Sleep , Social Isolation , Time Factors , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
15.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6): 359-366, 2020.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1134602

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic on the access to the emergency services of the Lazio Region (Central Italy) for time-dependent pathologies, for suspected SARS-CoV-2 symptoms, and for potentially inappropriate conditions. DESIGN: observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: accesses to the emergency departments (EDs) of Lazio Region hospitals in the first three months of 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: total number of accesses to the emergency room and number of specific accesses for cardio and cerebrovascular diseases, for severe trauma, for symptoms, signs, and ill-defined conditions, and for symptoms related to pneumonia. RESULTS: in the first 3 months of 2019, there were 429,972 accesses to the EDs of Lazio Region; in the same period of 2020, accesses arise to 353,806, (reduction of 21.5%), with a 73% reduction in the last three weeks of march 2020 as compared with the corresponding period of 2019. Comparing the first 3 months of the 2017-2019 with 2020, the accesses for acute coronary syndrome and acute cerebrovascular disease decreased since the 10th week up to more than 57% and 50%, respectively. The accesses due to symptoms, signs, and ill-defined conditions, proxy of potentially inappropriate conditions, decreased since the 8th week, with a maximum reduction of 70%. Access to severe trauma decreased by up to 70% in the 11th week. The accesses for pneumonia increased up to a 70% increment in the 12th week. CONCLUSIONS: the evaluation of accesses to emergency services during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic can provide useful elements for the promotion and improvement of the planning, for the management of critical situations, and for the reprogramming of the healthcare offer based on clinical and organizational appropriateness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Italy/epidemiology
16.
Recenti Prog Med ; 112(3): 195-206, 2021 03.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1123708

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus that causes a disease which can leads to a severe form of fatal pneumonia. At december 2020 in Italy, more than 2 million people have contracted the virus and 78,755 people have died. The scientific community is studying and testing numerous compounds that can be effective and safe for treating people with covid-19. AIM: To synthesize and evaluate the quality of evidence of efficacy and safety for the treatment. The available evidence is summarized in a living systematic review, a review that is constantly updated on the basis of the results of the new clinical studies. METHODS: A bibliographic search is launched weekly on the electronic databases and on the main clinical trial registers. Two researchers independently select the articles and assess the quality of the studies using the criteria developed by the Cochrane Collaboration, the certainty of the overall quality of the evidence is assessed using the GRADE criteria. RESULTS: At 31/12/2020, 101 randomized controlled studies were included that consider 72 different comparisons and include a total of 55,281 patients. 37 drugs are tested with respect to the standard treatment, 6 are evaluated against placebo and finally 29 compare different drugs with each other. By selecting studies that evaluate the efficacy and safety of a drug compared to standard treatment, which include at least 2 studies and which have low to high certainty of evidence, results show that corticosteroids, remdesivir, favipiravir, immunoglobulins, colchicine, and umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell infusion could reduce overall mortality. No differences for the risk of any adverse events are observed between convalescent plasma and remdesivir compared to standard treatment. Remdesivir probably reduces the risk of serious adverse events; a similar effect, although less strong, is also noted for tocilizumab and the lopinavir-ritonavir combination. In contrast, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids and convalescent plasma transfusion are associated with safety concerns with respect to the risk of serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The 101 studies included consider 72 comparisons and numerous outcomes, the results often coming from single studies and of small dimensions, and for 61% with a very low certainty of evidence, are difficult to summarize and the final result is to increase the uncertainty rather than providing useful information to the clinic and research. From all the work carried out it seems to us that the pandemic has highlighted the many shadows of scientific literature as tool to improve knowledge.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/adverse effects , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/therapeutic use , Amides/adverse effects , Amides/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Combined Modality Therapy , Drug Combinations , Drug Repositioning , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Immunization, Passive , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation , Pandemics , Pyrazines/adverse effects , Pyrazines/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Ritonavir/adverse effects , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Treatment Outcome , Uncertainty
17.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 236-243, 2020.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068144

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: to assess the temporal variation in excess total mortality and the portion of excess explained by COVID-19 deaths by geographical area, gender, and age during the COVID-19 epidemic. DESIGN: descriptive analysis of temporal variations of total excess deaths and COVID-19 deaths in the phase 1 and phase 2 of the epidemic in Italy. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 12 Northern cities and 20 Central-Southern cities from December 2019 to June 2020: daily mortality from the National Surveillance System of Daily Mortality (SiSMG) and COVID-19 deaths from the integrated COVID-19 surveillance system. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: total mortality excess and COVID-19 deaths, defined as deaths in microbiologically confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2, by gender and age groups. RESULTS: the largest excess mortality was observed in the North and during the first phase of the epidemic. The portion of excess mortality explained by COVID-19 decreases with age, decreasing to 51% among the very old (>=85 years). In phase 2 (until June 2020), the impact was more contained and totally attributable to COVID-19 deaths and this suggests an effectiveness of social distancing measures. CONCLUSIONS: mortality surveillance is a sensible information basis for the monitoring of health impact of the different phases of the epidemic and supporting decision making at the local and national level on containment measures to put in place in coming months.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Mortality/trends , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cause of Death , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Population Surveillance , Quarantine , Time Factors , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
18.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 144-151, 2020.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068134

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: one of the most affected European countries by the COVID-19 epidemic is Italy; data show the strong geographical heterogeneity of the epidemic. OBJECTIVES: to propose an analysis strategy to ascertain the non-random nature of the spatial spread of COVID-19 cases infection and identify any territorial aggregations, in order to enhance contact tracing activities in specific areas of the Lazio Region (Central Italy) and a large urban area as Rome. METHODS: all cases of COVID-19 of the Lazio Region notified to the Regional Service for Epidemiology, Surveillance, and Control of Infectious Diseases (Seresmi) with daily updates from the beginning of the epidemic to April 27, 2020 were considered. The analyses were carried out considering two periods (the first from the beginning of the epidemic to April 6 and the second from the beginning of the epidemic to April 27) and two different levels of spatial aggregation: the entire Lazio region excluding the Municipality of Rome, where the 377 municipalities represent the area units, and the Municipality of Rome, where the area units under study are the 155 urban areas (ZUR). The Scan statistic of Kulldorff was used to ascertain the non-random nature of the spatial spread of infected cases and to identify any territorial aggregations of cases of COVID-19 infection, using a retrospective spatial analysis in two overlapping periods. RESULTS: analysis was conducted at regional level in the two survey periods and revealed the presence of 7 localized clusters. In the Municipality of Rome, a single cluster (Historic Centre) was identified in the first period which includes 7 urban areas, while in the second period two distinct clusters (Omo and Farnesina) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Scan statistics are an important surveillance tool for monitoring disease outbreaks during the active phase of the epidemic and a useful contribution to epidemiological surveillance during the COVID-19 epidemic in a specific territory.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Spatial Analysis , COVID-19/transmission , Cluster Analysis , Geography, Medical , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Population Surveillance , Retrospective Studies , Rome/epidemiology , Urban Health
19.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 88-94, 2020.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068127

ABSTRACT

We are presenting here the findings of the reaction to the COVID-19 epidemic during the period March to June 2020 of those centres participating in the research EASY-NET which is on-going in Italy, funded by the Ministry of Health and co-founded by the Regional Health Authorities. The objective of EASY-NET is to evaluate the effectiveness of the audit and feedback (A&F) strategies in different clinical and organizational settings in seven regions. As a negative consequence of the COVID-19 epidemic, the activities of the project have suddenly slowed down; nevertheless, the COVID-19 epidemic represented an opportunity to apply the A&F methodology and support the healthcare within the regional authorities in order to manage and monitor the impact of this new disease. The reaction to the crisis on behalf of EASY-NET was inconsistent across the participating regions for various reasons. Factors which influenced the reaction levels in relation to the rapidity and efficiency of the implementation of the A&F strategies were as follows: the varying epidemiological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic in the various territories, the different clinical and organizational context and availability of expert research teams together with A&F procedures which had already been tested before the start of the epidemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Formative Feedback , Management Audit , Pandemics , Quality Assurance, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Chronic Disease/epidemiology , Critical Pathways , Emergencies/epidemiology , Geography, Medical , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Quality Improvement
20.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 51-59, 2020.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068124

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: the Covid-19 pandemic has provoked a huge of clinical and epidemiological research initiatives, especially in the most involved countries. However, this very large effort was characterized by several methodological weaknesses, both in the field of discovering effective treatments (with too many small and uncontrolled trials) and in the field of identifying preventable risks and prognostic factors (with too few large, representative and well-designed cohorts or case-control studies). OBJECTIVES: in response to the fragmented and uncoordinated research production on Covid-19, the   italian Association of Epidemiology (AIE) stimulated the formation of a working group (WG) with the aims of identifying the most important gaps in knowledge and to propose a structured research agenda of clinical and epidemiological studies considered at high priority on Covid-19, including recommendations on the preferable methodology. METHODS: the WG was composed by 25 subjects, mainly epidemiologists, statisticians, and other experts in specific fields, who have voluntarily agreed to the proposal. The agreement on a list of main research questions and on the structure of the specific documents to be produced were defined through few meetings and cycles of document exchanges. RESULTS: twelve main research questions on Covid-19 were identified, covering aetiology, prognosis, interventions, follow-up and impact on general and specific populations (children, pregnant women). For each of them, a two-page form was developed, structured in: background, main topics, methods (with recommendations on preferred study design and warnings for bias prevention) and an essential bibliography. CONCLUSIONS: this research agenda represents an initial contribution to direct clinical and epidemiological research efforts on high priority topics with a focus on methodological aspects. Further development and refinements of this agenda by Public Health Authorities are encouraged.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Epidemiologic Research Design , Pandemics , Research , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/therapy , Child , Epidemiology/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Prognosis , Societies, Scientific , Therapeutic Equipoise
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL