[COVID-19 and mental health services in Europe]. / COVID-19 e servizi di salute mentale in Europa.

The area of mental health is directly affected by the pandemic and its consequences, for various reasons: 1-the pandemic triggered a global lockdown, with dramatic socioeconomic and therefore psychosocial implications; 2-mental health services, which treat by definition a fragile population from the psychological, biological and social points of view, have a complex organizational frame, and it was expected that this would be affected (or overwhelmed) by the pandemic; 3-mental health services should, at least in theory, be able to help guide public health policies when these involve a significant modification of individual behaviour. It was conducted a narrative review of the publications produced by European researchers in the period February-June 2020 and indexed in PubMed. A total of 34 papers were analyzed, which document the profound clinical, organizational and procedural changes introduced in mental health services following this exceptional and largely unforeseen planetary event.Among the main innovations recorded everywhere, the strong push towards the use of telemedicine techniques should be mentioned: however, these require an adequate critical evaluation, which highlights their possibilities, limits, advantages and disadvantages instead of simple triumphalist judgments. Furthermore, should be emphasized the scarcity of quantitative studies conducted in this period and the absence of studies aimed, for example, at exploring the consequences of prolonged and forced face-to-face contact between patients and family members with a high index of "expressed emotions".

Impact of COVID-19 on diagnosis and management of paediatric inflammatory bowel disease during lockdown: a UK nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has impacted on healthcare provision. Anecdotally, investigations for children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have been restricted, resulting in diagnosis with no histological confirmation and potential secondary morbidity. In this study, we detail practice across the UK to assess impact on services and document the impact of the pandemic. METHODS: For the month of April 2020, 20 tertiary paediatric IBD centres were invited to contribute data detailing: (1) diagnosis/management of suspected new patients with IBD; (2) facilities available; (3) ongoing management of IBD; and (4) direct impact of COVID-19 on patients with IBD. RESULTS: All centres contributed. Two centres retained routine endoscopy, with three unable to perform even urgent IBD endoscopy. 122 patients were diagnosed with IBD, and 53.3% (n=65) were presumed diagnoses and had not undergone endoscopy with histological confirmation. The most common induction was exclusive enteral nutrition (44.6%). No patients with a presumed rather than confirmed diagnosis were started on anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.Most IBD follow-up appointments were able to occur using phone/webcam or face to face. No biologics/immunomodulators were stopped. All centres were able to continue IBD surgery if required, with 14 procedures occurring across seven centres. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic IBD practice has been hugely impacted by COVID-19, with >50% of new diagnoses not having endoscopy. To date, therapy and review of known paediatric patients with IBD has continued. Planning and resourcing for recovery is crucial to minimise continued secondary morbidity.