Increased antidepressant use during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the Friuli Venezia Giulia region, Italy, 2015-2020.

BACKGROUND: Few studies investigated the impact of the pandemic on antidepressant (AD) use. METHODS: The Social and Health Information System of Friuli Venezia Giulia region, Italy, provided data on AD use. Sex, age, AD class and month used the amount of AD prescriptions, measured by defined daily doses (DDD) per 1000 inhabitants per day, to compare AD use in 2020 with the period 2015-2019. A linear trend model predicted AD use for 2020, based on years 2015-2019. RESULTS: AD use was on average 20% higher in each month of 2020 when compared with the same month for the period 2015-2019, with an increase of more than 30% in the first four and in the last two months of 2020. The observed AD use in 2020 was higher than predicted, particularly in men, and in the 30-59 years age group. LIMITATIONS: Descriptive study of AD use without analysis of data at the individual level. No information on psychiatric diagnoses of AD users. CONCLUSION: AD use was higher in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further research is warranted to understand if this may be related to a rise in mental disorders in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on community-oriented mental health services: The experience of Friuli Venezia Giulia region, Italy.

OBJECTIVES: to assess the changes in prevalence, incidence and hospitalisation rates during the first four months of 2020, compared to the same period of 2019, in Friuli Venezia Giulia Mental Health Departments (MHDs); to analyse the features of MHDs patients tested for Sars-Cov-2, and to monitor whether MHDs applied and adhered to regional recommendations. METHODS: Observational study using MHDs' administrative data and individual data on suspected and positive cases of Sars-Cov-2. Adherence to recommentations was assessed using 21 indicators. Changes in rates were calculated by Poisson regression analysis, while the Fisher exact test was used for assessing differences between suspected and positive cases. RESULTS: The decrease in voluntary admission rates on 100,000 inhabitants in hospital services was significantly larger from January to April 2020, compared to the same period of 2019 (P<0.001), while no other data showed a significant decrease. Among the 82 cases tested for Sars-Cov-2, five were positive, and they significantly differ from suspected cases only in that they were at home or in supported housing facilities prior to the test. The MHDs mostly complied with the indicators in the month after the publication of recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient services continued to work normally during the emergency, while hospital services decreased their activities. A low number of positive cases was found among MHDs' users, which might be linked to a rapid reconversion of services, with an extensive use of home visits and telepsychiatry. These preliminary data should be interpreted with caution, due to the small size and the limited period of observation.

FMECA Application to Intraoperative Electron Beam Radiotherapy Procedure As a Quality Method to Prevent and Reduce Patient's Risk in Conservative Surgery for Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Failure Mode Effects and Criticalities Analysis (FMECA) represents a prospective method for risk assessment in complex medical practices. Our objective was to describe the application of FMECA approach to intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy (IOERT), delivered using a mobile linear accelerator, for the treatment of early breast cancer as an anticipated boost. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary Working Group, including several different professional profiles, was created before the beginning of clinical practice in 2012, with the purpose of writing the Flow Chart and applying the FMECA methodology to IOERT procedure. Several criticalities were identified a priori in the different steps of the procedure and a list of all potential failure modes (FMs) was drafted and ranked using the risk priority number (RPN) scoring system, based on the product of three parameters: severity, occurrence, and detectability (score between 1 and 5). The actions aimed at reducing the risk were then defined by the Working Group and the risk analysis was repeated in 2014 and in 2016, in order to assess the improvement achieved. RESULTS: Fifty-one FMs were identified, which represented the issues prospectively investigated according to the FMECA methodology. Considering a set threshold of 30, the evaluated RPNs show that 33 out of 51 FMs are critical; 6 are included in the moderate risk class (RPN: 31-40); 16 in the intermediate risk class (RPN: 41-50), and 11 in the high risk class (RPN: >50). DISCUSSION: The most critical steps concerned the surgical procedure and IOERT set-up. The introduction of the corrective actions into the clinical practice achieved the reduction of the RPNs in the re-analysis of the FMECA worksheet after 2 and 4 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: FMECA proved to be a useful tool for prospective evaluation of potential failures in IOERT and contributed to optimize patient safety and to improve risk management culture among all the professionals of the Working Group.