Indoor air pollution: an Italian Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) study among the general population.

Background: Indoor air pollution negatively affects population health and the national health services in terms of socio-economic costs. The presence of indoor pollutants depends a lot on lifestyles. Study design: The aim of this work is to evaluate knowledge, daily habits and the preventive behaviors in order to contrast the effects on health caused by indoor pollutants. Methods: The study was conducted through the administration of questionnaires to the population resident in the metropolitan city of Messina (Italy), asking about sociodemographic characteristics, knowledge, daily habits and preventive behaviors. Results: The questionnaire was filled by 894 subjects (46.8% M; 53.2% F). Regarding knowledge, 66.8% had heard of indoor air pollution and 94.9% knew what the most common indoor pollutants are; regarding daily habits they often aired out the house (91.9% in the morning and 71.4% after cleaning), 24.8% were smokers and 36.7 of them smoked indoors; regarding preventive behaviors, 41.6% chose the cleaning products based on habit and only 32.9% bought plants able to purify environments. Conclusions: Although the analyzed population had adequate knowledge of indoor air pollution, this did not strongly impact on the adoption of healthy lifestyles. Therefore, it becomes necessary to intervene on a social level with environmental education activities, starting from school age.

Quali sono la conoscenza, l'attitudine e la percezione dei rischi alimentari nei giovani adulti? Un'indagine effettuata in Italia.

BACKGROUND: in recent years, food safety has become increasingly important and a public health priority, especially in developed and rich countries. OBJECTIVES: to investigate knowledge and perception of food risk among young adults and the related behaviours. DESIGN: observational study conducted from March to October 2022 through the administration of an anonymous questionnaire based on multiple-choice questions spread online through social networks. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 317 men and women with a mean age of 23.6 ± 6.7 (71% F, 29% M), mainly students, who filled the questionnaire and gave their consent to the use of personal data for the purpose of scientific research. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: knowledge, attitudes, and perception of food risk in the target population. RESULTS: the majority think that food safety is very important to their health. The most perceived food risks are the presence of pesticides, bacterial and viral contamination, residuals of antibiotics and/or hormones, and microplastics. More than half believes to be poorly informed about the risk associated with food consumption. There is a high level of trust in data from scientific evidence and physicians and a low level of trust in data from European institutions and the Italian government. Almost everyone thinks that public authorities should provide more information. CONCLUSIONS: these data show a good knowledge of the importance of food safety for health; nevertheless, the majority does not feel well informed. The evaluation of the risk perception and of the factors influencing it is important for the success of the information/communication about food safety and for the consumer empowerment.

The Importance of COVID-19/Influenza Vaccines Co-Administration: An Essential Public Health Tool.

Vaccine co-administration is an important tool with several advantages for public health, among which is the increase of vaccination coverage, as well as economic and logistical benefits. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the immune response to the COVID-19 first booster dose in healthcare workers (HCWs) who chose co-administration and in HCWs who received only COVID-19 vaccination and to investigate personal opinions about the experience of co-administration. We carried out a retrospective analysis involving two groups of HCWs, both vaccinated with the complete primary cycle and the first booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, but one of them was also vaccinated, at the same time as the first booster dose, with the influenza vaccine. Active phone calls were also performed, and specific questions about the onset of side effects and general opinions were asked. A good immune response was found in both two groups without any statistically significant difference in the immune response. No severe reactions occurred in either group. A greater part of the sample was completely satisfied, and they would do it again. Our findings are totally in favor of the co-administration, considering the many positive aspects provided by administering, at the same time, more vaccines.

Reactogenicity and Humoral Immune Response after Heterologous Vaxzevria/Comirnaty Vaccination in a Group of Individuals Vaccinated in the AOU Policlinic "G. Martino" (Messina, Italy): A Retrospective Cohort Study.

On 11 June 2021, the Italian Ministry of Health authorized the heterologous vaccination schedule. The goals of our retrospective study were to (a) evaluate the undesirable effects after the administration of Vaxzevria and Comirnaty vaccines; (b) evaluate the antibody response after 28 days from the administration of the second dose; and (c) compare the antibody responses after the homologous and heterologous vaccination regimens. The undesirable effects were collected using a survey; IgG Spike was quantified using the electrochemiluminescence method; the comparison between the antibody responses was carried out using the sample of a homologous vaccine schedule previously analyzed. Pain at the injection site is the most common undesirable effect after the administration of both vaccines (62.1% after Vaxzevria vs. 82.75% after Comirnaty); swelling at the injection site is more frequent after the administration of Vaxzevria than after the administration of Comirnaty: (15.52% vs. 5.17%); headache is more frequent in women than in men for both the vaccination types (p < 0.05); 49.09% of the sample reported IgG Spike ≥ 12,500 U/mL; the antibody titer of the heterologous schedule is higher than that of the homologous vaccination. Our study demonstrated that the undesirable effects after the administration of the second dose are less frequent and less severe than after the administration of the first dose, and that the immunogenicity of the heterologous vaccinations is higher than that of the homologous ones.

COVID-19 serological evaluation in a cohort of Vaccinated and Seropositive healthcare workers.

INTRODUCTION: Severe Acquired Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection represents an unprecedented public health problem and, at present, vaccination is the only weapon available to combat the infection. The simplest and most immediate method to quantify the response of the subject's immune system to vaccination and / or infection is the serological assessment of the antibody titer. The objective of our study was 1) to evaluate the presence of antibody responses in a sample of healthcare workers subjected to a complete vaccination course as per ministerial provisions (double dose for negatives and single dose for ex-SARS-CoV subjects -2 positive) with Comirnaty vaccine (Pfizer / BioNTech) 2) evaluate the presence of statistically significant associations for sex, age and previous positive swab. MATERIALS AND METHODS: the antibody levels of both nucleocapsid antibodies and anti-Sars-CoV2 Spike antibodies of the study subjects were examined with the electrochemiluminescent immunoassay (ECLIA) method developed by Roche®. The cut-off value, as suggested by the manufacturer, for anti-nucleocapsid antibodies was 1 COI, while the Ig Spike value was 0.8 I / mL. The study sample was stratified by age (≤45 years, 46-55, ≥56 years old), previous positive molecular swab, gender and IgG S1 / S2 values ​​at the completed vaccination course (≤200, ≥200 AU / mL ). Statistical analyzes were carried out with the R software. RESULTS: almost all of the sample (89.45%) showed IgG Spike values> 200 AU / mL with statistically significant associations in relation to sex (greater in females, p≤0.05), to previous swab positivity in the presence of a vaccine dose (n = 44; p <0.001) and at age (with greater antibody response in subjects under 45; p <0.001). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The current study confirms what is reported in the literature. In the light of the results obtained, it could be interesting to promote studies that evaluate the antibody titers trend over time a) in women of childbearing age and postmenopausal age b) in particular categories of subjects with chronic degenerative diseases to assess the actual need for doses booster, it being understood that the immune system response is guaranteed by both cellular and humoral immunity and that the antibody titer does not faithfully reflect the protection obtained.