Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
Ann Ig ; 2022 Oct 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2080847

ABSTRACT

Background: During 2020, COVID-19 had a diversified distribution in Italy, the first nation in Europe to experience the outbreak of the epidemic. This was linked to geographical differences in population density and distribution of healthcare facilities, including Emergency Departments (EDs). This study aims to assess the impact of the pandemic on ED utilization in 2020 across different subpopulations and geographical locations in Italy. Methods: We used anonymized data from a survey conducted by the Italian National Institute of Statistics on 25,000 families to analyze the yearly rate of people who used EDs from 2015 to 2020. The rate of persons who accessed ED services in 2020 per 1,000 population was compared with those of the previous non-pandemic years. Results: The number of people accessing EDs in 2020 was 32.3% lower, although this reduction was not uniform across the 21 regions / autonomous provinces. People aged 0-14 years experienced the highest reduction in ED visits. In 2020, low educational level people exhibited a steeper reduction in the use of EDs. Conclusions: This study shows a significant drop in EDs use especially by children; the population section mostly affected by the effects of the pandemic. This study also confirms that education and socio-economic status are important determinants of ED use. The heterogeneous reduction in ED use across the regions of Italy highlights the need to further investigate the impact of this pattern on the health of the population, as well as to define adequate preparedness strategies to face future emergencies.

2.
Diabetes research and clinical practice ; 186:109382-109382, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1877003
4.
European Journal of Public Health ; 31, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1514686

ABSTRACT

Background Vaccine Hesitancy (VH) is considered by the WHO to be one of the ten threats of the 21st century. The Italian National Plan for Vaccine Prevention, as well as the European Action Plan, have among their objectives that of increasing the adherence to vaccinations both in general population and in categories at higher risk. It is precisely to these latter groups that the action of the Bologna Local Health Authority (LHA) has addressed targeted vaccination campaigns in recent years (e.g., DTP, HepB, PCV/PPV, RZV). Aim of our study was to investigate adherence to the proposed vaccination campaigns. Methods An anonymous QR-code scanned survey was administered to adults during the COVID-19 vaccine campaign in February in Bologna, a city in Northern Italy. Results A total of 2,321 participants were enrolled, 59% of whom were female. Among healthcare workers (n = 1,417), VH was 45.6% for Hib in 2020, 60.3% in 2019, and 68.3% in 2018;and 14.9% for HepB. Among people with chronic conditions (n = 149), 36.6% did not get the PCV/PPV vaccine. Among RZV vaccine recipients (n = 406), only 11.1% reported having been vaccinated. Women who were at least once pregnant in the last 5 years (n = 124), did not get the anti-pertussis vaccine in 41.9% of cases, and 71.8% of them refused the Hib vaccine. In general, the reasons most often given for missed vaccinations were ‘I did not inform myself enough about this specific vaccine' (ranging from 16.0% for Hib for healthcare workers to 44.8% for RZV), ‘I am not informed about the vaccinations I am entitled to' (27.3% for RZV, 31.8% for PCV/PPV), and ‘I do not find it useful' (46.2% for Hib in healthcare workers). Conclusions Our findings show that even in those who accept the COVID-19 vaccine, VH is high for other vaccinations campaigns run by the Bologna LHA. Targeted awareness and designed catch-up actions are needed, especially regarding this group that does not totally stand in the ranks of the so-called ‘no vax'. Key messages Vaccine Hesitancy toward other vaccines remains high among those who accept the anti-COVID-19 vaccination. A large number of hesitant respondents report either not being aware of the possibility of vaccination or not being adequately informed about the specific vaccine.

5.
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation ; 36(SUPPL 1):i307, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1402438

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Many studies are available that reported a higher risk of COVID-19 disease among patients on dialysis or with kidney transplantation, and the poor outcome of COVID-19 in these patients. Patients in conservative therapy for chronic kidney disease (CKD) have received lower attention, therefore little is known about how COVID-19 may affect this population. The aim of this study was to analyse the COVID-19 incidence and mortality in CKD patients followed up in an integrated healthcare program, living in a small area of Northern Italy. METHOD: The study population included CKD patients from the Emilia-Romagna Prevention of Progressive Renal Insufficiency (PIRP) project, followed up in the 4 nephrology units (Ravenna, Forlì, Cesena and Rimini) of AUSL Romagna (Italy) and alive at 1.01.2020. All patients were in conservative therapy and none of them had initiated dialysis or received kidney transplantation. The hospital discharge database was used to identify patients hospitalized with COVID-19 up to 31.07.2020, and the mortality database was used to assess mortality among patients with COVID-19 at the same date. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of COVID- 19 disease, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to identify predictors of COVID-19 mortality. Excess mortality of 2020 compared to mortality in 2015-19 in the PIRP cohort was also estimated. RESULTS: COVID-19 incidence among CKD patients was 4.09% (193/4716 patients), while in the general population it was 0.46% (5,195/1,125,574). COVID-19 was more likely in CKD patients with older age (Odds Ratio=1.038), cardiovascular comorbidities (OR=2.217), COPD (OR=1.559) and less likely in patients living in the province of Ravenna (OR=0.468), that was hit later by the first wave of pandemic compared to the other areas of AUSL Romagna. Baseline eGFR was lower in CKD patients with COVID-19 (31.7 vs. 35.8 ml/min/1.73 m2), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.066). As of 31.07.2020, the crude mortality rate among CKD patients with COVID-19 was 44.6% (86/193), compared to 4.7% (215/ 4523) in CKD patients without COVID-19 and to 14.5% (4289/29670) in the general population with COVID-19 of the Emilia-Romagna region. Factors associated with mortality of CKD patients with COVID-19 were older age (p=0.034) and the period of COVID-19 onset (p=0.003). The highest crude mortality rate (71.4%) was found in CKD patients for whom COVID-19 onset occurred between 8 and 21 March. The excess mortality of January-July 2020 with respect to the average mortality of January- July 2015-19 in the PIRP cohort was +17.7%, corresponding to 77 excess deaths. March-April was the period with the highest excess mortality (+69.8%), while in January-February a 15.9% lower mortality was observed with respect to the corresponding months of the five previous years. CONCLUSION: In our study, including a cohort of regularly followed up CKD patients, the risk of COVID-19 disease and of COVID-19 related mortality was comparable, or even somewhat higher, to that observed in patients on dialysis and those who received kidney transplantation. The incidence of COVID-19 in CKD patients was higher in the areas of AUSL Romagna earlier affected by the pandemic wave, whereas mortality rates were similar across all areas. CKD patients represent a population very vulnerable to COVID-19 disease, and their protection should be highly prioritized in the models of care and prevention measures.

6.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 9(4):10, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1210348

ABSTRACT

In the near future, COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials in larger cohorts may offer the possibility to implement child and adolescent vaccination. The opening of the vaccination for these strata may play a key role in order to limit virus circulation, infection spreading towards the most vulnerable subjects, and plan safe school reopening. Vaccine hesitancy (VH) could limit the ability to reach the coverage threshold required to ensure herd immunity. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and determinants of VH among parents/guardians toward a potentially available COVID-19 vaccination for children and adolescents. An online survey was performed in parents/guardians of children aged <18 years old, living in Bologna. Overall, 5054 questionnaires were collected. A vast majority (60.4%) of the parents/guardians were inclined to vaccinate, while 29.6% were still considering the opportunity, and 9.9% were hesitant. Highest vaccine hesitancy rates were detected in female parents/guardians of children aged 6-10 years, <=29 years old, with low educational level, relying on information found in the web/social media, and disliking mandatory vaccination policies. Although preliminary, these data could help in designing target strategies to implement adherence to a vaccination campaign, with special regard to web-based information.

7.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 9(4):13, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1209040

ABSTRACT

In March 2021, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic still poses a threat to the global population, and is a public health challenge that needs to be overcome. Now more than ever, action is needed to tackle vaccine hesitancy, especially in light of the availability of effective and safe vaccines. A cross-sectional online survey was carried out on a representative random sample of 1011 citizens from the Emilia-Romagna region, in Italy, in January 2021. The questionnaire collected information on socio-demographics, comorbidities, past vaccination refusal, COVID-19-related experiences, risk perception of infection, and likelihood to accept COVID-19 vaccination. Multiple logistic regression analyses and classification tree analyses were performed to identify significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy and to distinguish groups with different levels of hesitancy. Overall, 31.1% of the sample reported hesitancy. Past vaccination refusal was the key discriminating variable followed by perceived risk of infection. Other significant predictors of hesitancy were: ages between 35 and 54 years, female gender, low educational level, low income, and absence of comorbidities. The most common concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine involved safety (54%) and efficacy (27%). Studying the main determinants of vaccine hesitancy can help with targeting vaccination strategies, in order to gain widespread acceptance-a key path to ensure a rapid way out of the current pandemic emergency.

8.
Igiene e Sanita Pubblica ; 77(1):381-403, 2021.
Article in Italian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1196244

ABSTRACT

The Covid-19 pandemic significantly increased the workload for the Italian Health Service. There is few information in the literature on the pediatric population and on the management of pediatric hospitals. The aim of this article is to describe the management of healthcare services during Covid-19 emergency in Regina Margherita Children's Hospital. The Regina Margherita Children's Hospital is specialized in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of pediatric diseases. About 1000 health worker work in this Hospital and 278 hospitalization places are available.

9.
Public Health ; 194: 182-184, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1157676

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study is to compare excess mortality (EM) patterns and spatial correlation between the first and second wave of the pandemic in Lombardy, the Italian region that paid an extremely high COVID-19-related mortality toll in March and April 2020. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a longitudinal study using municipality-level mortality data. METHODS: We investigated the patterns and spatial correlation of EM of men aged ≥75 years during the first two pandemic waves (March-April 2020 vs November 2020) of COVID-19, using the mortality data released by the Italian National Institute of Statistics. EM was estimated at the municipality level to accurately detect the critical areas within the region. RESULTS: The areas that were mostly hit during the first wave of COVID-19 were generally spared by the second wave: EM of men aged ≥75 years in the municipality of Bergamo plummeted from +472% in March and April to -13% in November, and in Cremona the variation was from +344% to -19%. Conversely, in November 2020 EM was higher in some areas that had been protected in the first wave of the pandemic. Spatial correlation widely corroborates these findings, as large sections of the hot spots of EM detected in the first wave of the pandemic changed into cold spots in the second wave, and vice versa. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal the specular distribution of EM between the first and second wave of the pandemic, which may entail the consequences of social distancing measures and individual behaviors, local management strategies, 'harvesting' of the frailer population and, possibly, acquired immune protection. In conclusion, our findings support the need for continuous monitoring and analysis of mortality data using detailed spatial resolution.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Pandemics , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cities/epidemiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Mortality/trends , Small-Area Analysis , Spatial Analysis
10.
European Journal of Public Health ; 30, 2020.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1015322

ABSTRACT

Background The recent COVID-19 epidemic is showing how the response of the scientific literature is fundamental in the first days following the onset of a new epidemic. Quantifying which studies have a greatest impact can help researchers and policymakers in controlling the epidemic. The aim of this study is to describe the early scientific production in response to the COVID-19 epidemic through a scientometric analysis. Methods The study consisted of: 1) review of the scientific literature produced in the 30 days since the first paper related to COVID-19 has been published on Pubmed;2) Identification of papers' Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) and analysis of related metrics with the construction of a 'Computed Impact Score' (CIS) that represents a unifying score over heterogeneous bibliometric indicators. The CIS takes into account all the bibliometric indicators both traditional (i.e. counting of citations) and alternative (i.e. altmetrics). In this study we use the altmetrics provided by Plum Analytics (PlumX). All bibliometric indicators for the selected papers have been collected by using their corresponding DOIs as the key for querying Scopus API, which integrates PlumX. On top of those indicators we compute the CIS. The papers with higher CIS are discussed and presented. Results 239 papers have been included in the study. A threshold for CIS of t = 1.04 (i.e.95% quantile) allowed us to record 8 papers as potentially impactful. The 8 papers are: 6 case reports, 1 methodological study, 1 editorial. First authors come from China (n = 6), USA (n = 1) and Germany (n = 1). The main topics are: case/s description (n = 5), outbreak investigation (n = 2) and 1 genomic study. Conclusions The early response of the scientific literature during an epidemic does not follow a pre-established pattern. Tracing the traditional and non-traditional metrics measures of papers can help to understand and evaluate the impact of literature on the scientific community and general population. Key messages The dynamic of the scientific community represents an important aspect of the early response to the onset of a new epidemic, which must be studied also to increase systems’ preparedness. In a connected digital world, tracing metrics measures of scientific papers can identify those with the greatest impact and help professionals to correctly inform the population.

12.
Public Health ; 187: 187-188, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-695148
13.
Public Health ; 185: 39-41, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-526618
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL