Search

The COVID-19 crisis has drastically impacted the travel medicine field worldwide. In this perspective we have captured the challenges faced by travel clinicians in three Southern European countries: Italy, Spain and Portugal. Current practices, solutions and areas for improvement in these specific countries are discussed.

Background Positive behaviour and user's collaboration improved by using choices orientation techniques; in Lucca's Hospital (North-West Tuscany Sanitary Authority) this approach has improved separate waste collection execution and has decreased cigarettes dumping in commons areas. Objectives Phase 1 (May 2019): amendment of choices architecture recyclable waste bins in commons areas and into the wards were boosted, with “islands” clearly visible from any point of common paths; in the transit areas were installed exclusively multi-material and paper bins, equipped with signs that clearly indicate which products deliver; residual waste bins were allowed exclusively in certain points.ashtrays at the hospital entrances were eliminated and replaced with signage indicating smoking cessation benefits and the presence of areas “put your cigarette out” along the structure approach routes. Phase 2 (scheduled for May 2020): “nudge” action Spreading in community (using press and social-media) and locally (using poster) of the slogan “In San Luca we are taking a step forward: don't lag behind!”. This message stimulate the perception of an ongoing change to join. Results A decrease in residual waste collection and in instances of non-compliance in separate waste collection was detected. Decorum in the outdoor environments improved, with a reduction of user's reports and extra-cleaning interventions. Conclusions The described actions have improved user's collaboration, management efficiency of waste disposal and cleaning service, perceived quality and cost. Key messages Imitating a social model appears to be successful motivator of virtuous behaviours. Choices architecture and “nudge” techniques may improve citizens’ care pathways governance.

Background In a world where travelling can play a central role among human activities, due to the migratory flows increase and to the facilitation of exchanges between distant countries, the need to ensure healthcare to all travellers becomes a key point among healthcare activities. The aim of the study is to assess Italian Travel Clinics activity, critical issues, requirements and tips for improvement. Methods During the period from May to September, the Italian Society of Travel Medicine and Migrations (SIMVIM), performed a national on-line survey addressed to all Italian Travel Clinics. Results More than a third of Italian Travel Clinics replied the survey (79 clinics). The results show that on average for each clinic there are 4 healthcare workers (2 physicians, 1 nurse and 1 health worker), about 10 hours/week are dedicated to the clinic, the users are 18 and the Visiting Friends and Relatives (VFR) are 17%. In only 25% of cases the clinic is open access and in 80% there is a digital immunization registry. More than 70% of the healthcare workers have the last update in the two-year period of 2017/2018. Major critical issues are shortage of staff, limited opportunities to update, absence of a dedicated software, expensive vaccinations particularly for VFR, reduced visibility of the clinic and difficulties in accessing, Travel Clinics not sufficiently integrated into the National Health System. Conclusions Italian Travel Clinics are carring out a good service to ensure healthcare to the greatest number of travellers, but there is extensive room of improvement. Key messages We should create a network where Travel Clinics work together with General Practitioners, Pediatricians, other Specialists, Pharmacists, travel agents and above all with stakeholders. In this way Travel Clinics can involve an increasing number of travellers through an active offer of vaccinations and a careful risk assessment based on professional skills and expert knowledge.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to investigate knowledge and practices about influenza among patients on dialysis services of Italian hospitals at risk of severe influenza infection and vaccine and to identify predictive factors to vaccination adherence. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was carried out from January 2017 to July 2017 after the 2016/2017 influenza vaccination campaign. The questionnaire was administered to all patients treated in seven large Italian dialysis services. It consisted of influenza vaccination coverage, knowledge about influenza and its vaccination, perceived risk of influenza complications, recommendations on influenza uptake received by general practitioner (GP) and nephrologist. Results: Response rate was 90% (703/781). Patients’ knowledge about influenza infection and vaccine were detected by nine closed questions: 35.6% of responders answered correctly to ≥ 6 sentences, 47.5% of them reported that “influenza vaccine can cause influenza” and 45.7% believed that “antibiotics are a correct strategy to treat influenza”. Levels of perceived risks of hospitalisation and death were low in 39.3% and 16.5% of patients respectively. The adherence to the last seasonal influenza vaccination was 57.5%. The multivariate predictors of influenza vaccination uptake resulted: age ≥65, male, consulting TV/radio, asking information to GP and/or nephrologist. Conclusions: The study reveals the low adherence to influenza vaccination and the subotpimal level of knowledge in dialysis patients. Different strategies, including a greater alliance among nephrologists and GPs to prevent influenza should be encouraged to improve the adherence to influenza vaccination in this at risk group.

To date three vaccines against human papilloma virus (HPV) have been licensed: a bivalent, a quadrivalent and, in 2014, a nonavalent vaccine. Despite the early implementation of national vaccination programs, in the majority of developed countries coverage rates remain unsatisfactory. Rumors about vaccine safety have been one of the principal obstacles for the acceptance of HPV vaccination by the public. It is therefore of primary importance to provide the public with clear and up-to-date information about HPV vaccination safety. To this aim, in this narrative review we will summarize safety data from pre and postlicensure studies for the three HPV vaccines available with a focus on the safety profile of the new nonavalent vaccine.