Search

Several countries started a 2nd booster COVID-19 vaccination campaign targeting the elderly population, but evidence around its effectiveness is still scarce. This study aims to estimate the relative effectiveness of a 2nd booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the population aged ≥ 80 years in Italy, during predominant circulation of the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariants. We linked routine data from the national vaccination registry and the COVID-19 surveillance system. On each day between 11 April and 6 August 2022, we matched 1:1, according to several demographic and clinical characteristics, individuals who received the 2nd booster vaccine dose with individuals who received the 1st booster vaccine dose at least 120 days earlier. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to compare the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death) between the two groups, calculating the relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) as (1 - risk ratio)X100. Based on the analysis of 831,555 matched pairs, we found that a 2nd booster dose of mRNA vaccine, 14-118 days post administration, was moderately effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to a 1st booster dose administered at least 120 days earlier [14.3 %, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.2-20.2]. RVE decreased from 28.5 % (95 % CI: 24.7-32.1) in the time-interval 14-28 days to 7.6 % (95 % CI: -14.1 to 18.3) in the time-interval 56-118 days. However, RVE against severe COVID-19 was higher (34.0 %, 95 % CI: 23.4-42.7), decreasing from 43.2 % (95 % CI: 30.6-54.9) to 27.2 % (95 % CI: 8.3-42.9) over the same time span. Although RVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection was much reduced 2-4 months after a 2nd booster dose, RVE against severe COVID-19 was about 30 %, even during prevalent circulation of the Omicron BA.5 subvariant. The cost-benefit of a 3rd booster dose for the elderly people who received the 2nd booster dose at least four months earlier should be carefully evaluated.

BackgroundThe rapid rise of Sars-Cov2 B.1.1.529 variant (named Omicron) in the late November 2021 prompted the health authorities to estimate the potential impact on the existing countermeasures, including vaccines. This meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of the current Sars-Cov2 vaccine regimens against laboratory-confirmed Omicron infection. A secondary endpoint aims to investigate the waning effectiveness of primary vaccination against symptomatic Omicron infection and related hospitalization.MethodsThe systematic review started on December 1, 2021 and was concluded on March 1, 2022. Random-effects (RE) frequentist meta-analyses are performed to estimate the primary vaccination course and the booster dose effectiveness against Omicron. Multiple meta-regressions are performed under mixed-effects model. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021240143.FindingsIn total, 15 out of 502 records are included in the quantitative synthesis. The meta-analysis on B.1.1.529 infection risk produces an OR=0·69 (95%CI: 0·57 to 0·83; τ2=0·225; I2=99·49%) after primary vaccination and an OR=0·30 (95%CI: 0·23 to 0·39; τ2=0·469; I2=99·33%) after one additional booster dose. According to the multiple meta-regression models, one booster dose significantly decreases by 69% the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection (OR=0·31; 95%CI: 0·23 to 0·40) and by 88% the risk of hospitalization (OR=0·12; 95%CI: 0·08 to 0·19) with respect to unvaccinated. Six months after primary vaccination, the average risk reduction declines to 22% (OR=0·78; 95%CI: 0·69 to 0·88) against symptomatic infection and to 55% against hospitalization (OR=0·45; 95%CI: 0·30 to 0·68).InterpretationDespite the high heterogeneity, this study confirms that primary vaccination does not provide sufficient protection against symptomatic Omicron infection. Although the effectiveness of the primary vaccination against hospitalization due to Omicron remains significantly above 50% after 3 months, it dramatically fades after 6 months. Therefore, the administration of one additional booster dose is recommended within 6 months and provides a 76% decrease in the odds of symptomatic Omicron after five months.FundingThere was no funding source for this study.ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTSthe primary vaccination decreases the risk of Omicron infection by 31%, while one additional booster dose decreases the risk by 70%the primary vaccination course reduces the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection by 24% and the risk of hospitalization by 50%one additional booster dose decreases by 69% the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection and the risk of hospitalization by 88%the effectiveness of the primary vaccination against hospitalization dramatically wanes after 3 months from vaccination, reaching a minimum of 45% in risk reduction after more than 6 monthsPANEL: research in contextEvidence before this studyOmicron variant’s higher transmissibility combined with an increased risk of infection among individuals vaccinated with primary vaccination have prompted health authorities to introduce a booster vaccination. The systematic review including “vaccine effectiveness”, “Covid-19”, “SARS-CoV-2”, and “Omicron” search terms, is performed over three web engines and one early stage research platform (i.e., WHO COVID-19 DATABASE, PubMed, medRxiv + bioRxiv) Additionally, all relevant web sources reporting living data on vaccine effectiveness (i.e., https://view-hub.org/covid-19/ and https://covid-nma.com/), electronic databases and grey literature are considered. The last search update was on March 1, 2022. No country, language, study design restrictions are applied.Added value of this studyPrimary vaccination provides relatively low protection against the Omicron VOC, while one additional booster dose decreased substantially the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection and of hospitalization.Implications of all the available evidenceThe booster dose should be recommended after three months and no later than six months after the primary course vaccination, in order to avoid severe consequences, in particular among the elderly population.

By April 13, 2022, more than 4 months after the approval of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) for children, less than 40% of 5-11-year-olds in Italy had been vaccinated against COVID-19. Estimating how effective vaccination is in 5-11-year-olds in the current epidemiological context dominated by the omicron variant (B.1.1.529) is important to inform public health bodies in defining vaccination policies and strategies.In this retrospective population analysis, we assessed vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19, defined as an infection leading to hospitalisation or death, by linking the national COVID-19 surveillance system and the national vaccination registry. All Italian children aged 5-11 years without a previous diagnosis of infection were eligible for inclusion and were followed up from Jan 17 to April 13, 2022. All children with inconsistent vaccination data, diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection before the start date of the study or without information on the municipality of residence were excluded from the analysis. With unvaccinated children as the reference group, we estimated vaccine effectiveness in those who were partly vaccinated (one dose) and those who were fully vaccinated (two doses).By April 13, 2022, 1 063 035 (35·8%) of the 2 965 918 children aged 5-11 years included in the study had received two doses of the vaccine, 134 386 (4·5%) children had received one dose only, and 1 768 497 (59·6%) were unvaccinated. During the study period, 766 756 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and 644 cases of severe COVID-19 (627 hospitalisations, 15 admissions to intensive care units, and two deaths) were notified. Overall, vaccine effectiveness in the fully vaccinated group was 29·4% (95% CI 28·5-30·2) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 41·1% (22·2-55·4) against severe COVID-19, whereas vaccine effectiveness in the partly vaccinated group was 27·4% (26·4-28·4) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 38·1% (20·9-51·5) against severe COVID-19. Vaccine effectiveness against infection peaked at 38·7% (37·7-39·7) at 0-14 days after full vaccination and decreased to 21·2% (19·7-22·7) at 43-84 days after full vaccination.Vaccination against COVID-19 in children aged 5-11 years in Italy showed a lower effectiveness in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 than in individuals aged 12 years and older. Effectiveness against infection appears to decrease after completion of the current primary vaccination cycle.None.For the Italian translation of the summary see Supplementary Materials section.

Consolidated information on the effectiveness of COVID-19 booster vaccination in Europe are scarce. We assessed the effectiveness of a booster dose of an mRNA vaccine against any SARS-CoV-2 infection (symptomatic or asymptomatic) and severe COVID-19 (hospitalization or death) after over two months from administration among priority target groups (n = 18,524,568) during predominant circulation of the Delta variant in Italy (July–December 2021). Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and, to a lesser extent, against severe COVID-19, among people ≥60 years and other high-risk groups (i.e. healthcare workers, residents in long-term-care facilities, and persons with comorbidities or immunocompromised), peaked in the time-interval 3–13 weeks (VE against infection = 67.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 62.5–71.3; VE against severe disease = 89.5%, 95% CI: 86.1–92.0) and then declined, waning 26 weeks after full primary vaccination (VE against infection = 12.2%, 95% CI: −4.7–26.4; VE against severe disease = 65.3%, 95% CI: 50.3–75.8). After 3–10 weeks from the administration of a booster dose, VE against infection and severe disease increased to 76.1% (95% CI: 70.4–80.7) and 93.0% (95% CI: 90.2–95.0), respectively. These results support the ongoing vaccination campaign in Italy, where the administration of a booster dose four months after completion of primary vaccination is recommended.

(1) Background: The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in terms of prevention of disease and transmission in the pre-Delta era. The evaluation was narrowed to two mRNA vaccines and two modified adenovirus-vectored vaccines. (2) Methods: The overall risk of any SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by positive real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test was estimated in partially and fully vaccinated individuals. The evidence synthesis was pursued through a random-effects meta-analysis. The effect size was expressed as relative risk (RR) and RRR (RR reduction) of SARS-CoV-2 infection following vaccination. Heterogeneity was investigated through a between-study heterogeneity analysis and a subgroup meta-analysis. (3) Results: The systematic review identified 27 studies eligible for the quantitative synthesis. Partially vaccinated individuals presented a RRR = 73% (95%CI = 59–83%) for positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR (RR = 0.27) and a RRR=79% (95%CI = 30–93%) for symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR (RR = 0.21). Fully vaccinated individuals showed a RRR = 94% (95%CI = 88–98%) for SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR (RR = 0.06) compared to unvaccinated individuals. The full BNT162b2 vaccination protocol achieved a RRR = 84–94% against any SARS-CoV-2-positive PCR and a RRR = 68–84% against symptomatic positive PCR. (4) Conclusions: The meta-analysis results suggest that full vaccination might block transmission. In particular, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection appeared higher for non-B.1.1.7 variants and individuals aged ≥69 years. Considering the high level of heterogeneity, these findings must be taken with caution. Further research on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectiveness against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants is encouraged.

OBJECTIVETo assess the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in terms of prevention of disease and transmission. The evaluation was narrowed to two mRNA vaccines and two modified adenovirus vectored vaccines.METHODSA frequentist random effects meta-analysis was carried out after data extraction. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using New-Castle-Ottawa Scale. The overall risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by real time Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) was estimated in partially and fully vaccinated individuals. The effect size was expressed as Relative Risk (RR) and RRR (RR reduction) of SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination. Potential sources of heterogeneity were investigated through between-study heterogeneity analysis and subgroup meta-analysis.RESULTSThe systematic review identified 27 studies eligible for the quantitative synthesis. Partially vaccinated individuals presented a RRR=73% (95%CI=59%-83%) for any positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR (RR=0.27) and a RRR=79% (95%CI=30%-93%) for symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR (RR=0.21). Fully vaccinated individuals showed a RRR=94% (95%CI=88%-98%) for any SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR (RR=0.06) compared to unvaccinated. According to the subgroup meta-analysis, full BNT162b2 vaccination protocol achieved a RRR=84%-94% against any SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR and a RRR=68%-84% against symptomatic positive PCR. The RR for any SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR remained higher within elderly groups aged ≥69 years (RR=0.12-0.15) compared to younger individuals (RR=0.05-0.12). The RR against B.1.351 infection approached 0.40 for any positive PCR and 0.36 for symptomatic SARS-COV-2 while the RR of any B.1.1.7 infection was 0.14.CONCLUSIONThe current licensed vaccines may be transmission blocking, especially after full vaccination protocol. Given the substantial heterogeneity, results should be interpreted with caution. Subgroups meta-analyses suggested that the risk of any SARS-CoV-2 infection may be higher for non-B.1.1.7 variants and individuals aged ≥69 years. Further data and longer follow-up are required to investigate additional sources of heterogeneity and the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination within population subgroups.STRENGTHSReal-world data suggest that the current licensed vaccines may be transmission blocking, in particular after full vaccination protocol.The risk of any SARS-CoV-2 infection either symptomatic or asymptomatic, may be higher for non-B.1.1.7 variants and individuals aged ≥69 years.LIMITATIONSGiven the substantial heterogeneity encountered in this meta-analysis, results should be interpreted with cautionFur ther evidence on the impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants are vital in order to monitor mutations associated with vaccine escape

In 2013, in a bid to combat Vaccine Hesitancy (VH) and provide information on vaccines by communicating with the general public and the health community (e.g., healthcare workers and public health operators), the Italian Society of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine (S.It.I.) published the national website “VaccinarSì”. The project was subsequently extended to ten Italian Regions. This led to the creation of the VaccinarSì Network, whose websites are publicly owned. The aim of this work was to present the framework of the websites of the VaccinarSì Network and to analyse user behaviour in the pre-COVID-19-era (dating from each website’s publication until 31 January 2020) and in the COVID-19-era (from 1 February 2020 to 31 January 2021). Some metrics such as the number of visits to the site (sessions, number of users and average session duration), user behaviour (pages viewed, bounce rate and organic search) and the session acquisition path (direct traffic, referrals and social traffic) were searched, extrapolated and processed with Google Analytics. Qualitative and normally distributed quantitative variables were summarised with their absolute (relative) frequencies and means. Statistical differences between the means of the two periods were evaluated through paired t-test. A two-tailed p-value less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. When the total values recorded over the period were compared, an overall increase in metrics was observed—the number of individual users, visits and individual pageviews rose in a statistically significant way. Our study aimed to highlight how combining disciplines such as health education and digital communication via Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) represents the best strategy to support citizens. This approach gives them the tools to become independent and responsible players that are capable of voluntarily and consciously choosing to adhere to vaccination programs. The VaccinarSì Network’s goal for the future is to reach an even wider audience. By building each user’s critical knowledge, this network enables users to be active components of a wider, more empowered community.

Background International literature suggests that disadvantaged groups are at higher risk of morbidity and mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection due to poorer living/working conditions and barriers to healthcare access. Yet, to date, there is no evidence of this disproportionate impact on non-national individuals, including economic migrants, short-term travellers and refugees. Methods We analyzed data from the Italian surveillance system of all COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed cases tested positive from the beginning of the outbreak (20th of February) to the 19th of July 2020. We used multilevel negative-binomial regression models to compare the case fatality and the rate of admission to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) between Italian and non-Italian nationals. The analysis was adjusted for differences in demographic characteristics, pre-existing comorbidities, and period of diagnosis. Results We analyzed 213 180 COVID-19 cases, including 15 974 (7.5%) non-Italian nationals. We found that, compared to Italian cases, non-Italian cases were diagnosed at a later date and were more likely to be hospitalized {[adjusted rate ratio (ARR)=1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.33–1.44]} and admitted to ICU (ARR=1.19, 95% CI: 1.07–1.32), with differences being more pronounced in those coming from countries with lower human development index (HDI). We also observed an increased risk of death in non-Italian cases from low-HDI countries (ARR=1.32, 95% CI: 1.01–1.75). Conclusions A delayed diagnosis in non-Italian cases could explain their worse outcomes compared to Italian cases. Ensuring early access to diagnosis and treatment to non-Italians could facilitate the control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and improve health outcomes in all people living in Italy, regardless of nationality.

COVID-19 vaccination is allowing a progressive release of restrictions worldwide. Using a mathematical model, we assess the impact of vaccination in Italy since December 27, 2020 and evaluate prospects for societal reopening after emergence of the Delta variant. We estimate that by June 30, 2021, COVID-19 vaccination allowed the resumption of about half of pre-pandemic social contacts. In absence of vaccination, the same number of cases is obtained by resuming only about one third of pre-pandemic contacts, with about 12,100 (95% CI: 6,600-21,000) extra deaths (+27%; 95% CI: 15–47%). Vaccination offset the effect of the Delta variant in summer 2021. The future epidemic trend is surrounded by substantial uncertainty. Should a pediatric vaccine (for ages 5 and older) be licensed and a coverage >90% be achieved in all age classes, a return to pre-pandemic society could be envisioned. Increasing vaccination coverage will allow further reopening even in absence of a pediatric vaccine., Vaccination campaigns against COVID-19 are allowing the progressive release of physical distancing restrictions in many countries. Here, the authors assess the impact of the vaccination program in Italy and evaluate possible prospects for reopening the society while at the same time keeping COVID-19 under control.

Background On 20 February 2020, a locally acquired coronavirus disease (COVID-19) case was detected in Lombardy, Italy. This was the first signal of ongoing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the country. The number of cases in Italy increased rapidly and the country became the first in Europe to experience a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. Aim Our aim was to describe the epidemiology and transmission dynamics of the first COVID-19 cases in Italy amid ongoing control measures. Methods We analysed all RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases reported to the national integrated surveillance system until 31 March 2020. We provide a descriptive epidemiological summary and estimate the basic and net reproductive numbers by region. Results Of the 98,716 cases of COVID-19 analysed, 9,512 were healthcare workers. Of the 10,943 reported COVID-19-associated deaths (crude case fatality ratio: 11.1%) 49.5% occurred in cases older than 80 years. Male sex and age were independent risk factors for COVID-19 death. Estimates of R0 varied between 2.50 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.18–2.83) in Tuscany and 3.00 (95% CI: 2.68–3.33) in Lazio. The net reproduction number Rt in northern regions started decreasing immediately after the first detection. Conclusion The COVID-19 outbreak in Italy showed a clustering onset similar to the one in Wuhan, China. R0 at 2.96 in Lombardy combined with delayed detection explains the high case load and rapid geographical spread. Overall, Rt in Italian regions showed early signs of decrease, with large diversity in incidence, supporting the importance of combined non-pharmacological control measures.

SUMMARYBackgroundIn February 2020, a locally-acquired COVID-19 case was detected in Lombardia, Italy. This was the first signal of ongoing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the country. The outbreak rapidly escalated to a national level epidemic, amid the WHO declaration of a pandemic.MethodsWe analysed data from the national case-based integrated surveillance system of all RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 infections as of March 24th 2020, collected from all Italian regions and autonomous provinces. Here we provide a descriptive epidemiological summary on the first 62,843 COVID-19 cases in Italy as well as estimates of the basic and net reproductive numbers by region.FindingsOf the 62,843 cases of COVID-19 analysed, 71.6% were reported from three Regions (Lombardia, Veneto and Emilia-Romagna). All cases reported after February 20th were locally acquired. Estimates of R0 varied between 2.5 (95%CI: 2.18-2.83) in Toscana and 3 (95%CI: 2.68-3.33) in Lazio, with epidemic doubling time of 3.2 days (95%CI: 2.3-5.2) and 2.9 days (95%CI: 2.2-4.3), respectively. The net reproduction number showed a decreasing trend starting around February 20-25, 2020 in Northern regions. Notably, 5,760 cases were reported among health care workers. Of the 5,541 reported COVID-19 associated deaths, 49% occurred in people aged 80 years or above with an overall crude CFR of 8.8%. Male sex and age were independent risk factors for COVID-19 death.InterpretationThe COVID-19 infection in Italy emerged with a clustering onset similar to the one described in Wuhan, China and likewise showed worse outcomes in older males with comorbidities. Initial R0 at 2.96 in Lombardia, explains the high case-load and rapid geographical spread observed. Overall Rt in Italian regions is currently decreasing albeit with large diversities across the country, supporting the importance of combined non-pharmacological control measures.Fundingroutine institutional funding was used to perform this work.

Counteract vaccine hesitancy is a public health priority. Main objectives of the cross-sectional study conducted were to evaluate knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding vaccination issues, to estimate the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy and to estimate the effectiveness of vaccination counseling on community advocacy in a sample of general population. An anonymous validated questionnaire was administered in April 2017 at the main shopping center of Palermo and was followed by tailored vaccination counseling interventions. To estimate the effectiveness of the interventions four main connection parameters to the vaccinarsi.org website were evaluated, in the two months before and after the intervention and in the two months before the intervention compared with the same period of previous and following years. Among the 299 subject enrolled 12.7% were hesitant about vaccinations, and 4.7% declared being against vaccinations. General practitioners (GPs) and pediatricians were the most affordable source of information about vaccinations. A higher probability of vaccination hesitancy/refusal was reported among subjects who considered “alternative strategies” the best way for the prevention of infectious diseases (adj-OR=7.01, IC95% 2.88–17.09, p-value < 0.001). A considerable increase of all the vaccinarsi.org website indicators analyzed was observed, from the area in which survey participants lived. Prevalence of vaccine hesitancy among population surveyed is consistent with the literature data. HCWs, such as GPs and pediatricians, should play a key role in modifying personal convictions and choices about vaccinations. A proper vaccination counseling could improve attitudes regarding vaccination issues, such as quality of web-based research.

ObjectivesTo estimate the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe covid-19 at different time after vaccination.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingItaly, 27 December 2020 to 7 November 2021.Participants33 250 344 people aged ≥16 years who received a first dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine and did not have a previous diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.Main outcome measuresSARS-CoV-2 infection and severe covid-19 (admission to hospital or death). Data were divided by weekly time intervals after vaccination. Incidence rate ratios at different time intervals were estimated by multilevel negative binomial models with robust variance estimator. Sex, age group, brand of vaccine, priority risk category, and regional weekly incidence in the general population were included as covariates. Geographic region was included as a random effect. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness was calculated as (1−IRR)×100, where IRR=incidence rate ratio, with the time interval 0-14 days after the first dose of vaccine as the reference.ResultsDuring the epidemic phase when the delta variant was the predominant strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly decreased (PConclusionsThe results support the vaccination campaigns targeting high risk people, those aged ≥60 years, and healthcare workers to receive a booster dose of vaccine six months after the primary vaccination cycle. The results also suggest that timing the booster dose earlier than six months after the primary vaccination cycle and extending the offer of the booster dose to the wider eligible population might be warranted.

Vaccine knowledge of the general population is shaped by different information sources and strongly influences vaccination attitudes and uptake. The CCM-Italian Ministry of Health ESCULAPIO project attempted to identify the role of such information sources, in order to address adequate strategies to improve information on vaccines and vaccine preventable diseases. In the present study, data on 632 adults from Southern Italy regarding information sources were collected, and their perceived and actual knowledge on vaccinations were compared and analyzed in relation to socio-demographic characteristics and information sources. The main reported reference sources were general practitioners (GPs) (42.5%) and pediatricians (33.1%), followed by mass media (24.1%) and the Internet (17.6%). A total of 45.4% reported they believed to be informed (45.4%), while those estimated to be truly informed were 43.8%. However, as showed in the multivariate logistic regression, people having the perception to be correctly informed ascribed their good knowledge to their profession in the health sector (Adj OR 2.28, CI 1.09–4.77, p < 0.05) and to friends/relatives/colleagues (AdjOR 6.25, CI 2.38–16.44, p < 0.001), while the non-informed population thought the responsibility had to be attributed to mass media (AdjOR 0.45, CI 0.22–0.92, p < 0.05). Those showing the real correct information, instead, were younger (AdjOR 1.64, CI 1.04–2.59, p < 0.05), and their main reference sources were pediatricians (AdjOR 1.63, CI 1.11–2.39, p < 0.05) and scientific magazines (Adj OR 3.39, CI 1.51–7.59, p < 0.01). Only 6% knew the “VaccinarSì” portal, developed to counter the widespred antivaccine websites in Italy. The post-survey significant increase of connections to “VaccinarSi” could be ascribed to the counselling performed during questionnaire administration. Strategies to improve information about vaccination should be addressed to fortifying healthcare workers knowledge in order to make them public health opinion leaders. General population should be provided with correct indications on trustworthy websites on vaccines to contrast false information supplied by anti-vaccinists on their own websites or social networks pages and on the mass media.

Background Continuous assessment of hepatitis A virus (HAV) seroepidemiology is a useful tool to control the risk of infection. Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the changing patterns of anti-HAV seroprevalence in a population,which isgenerally considered to be anarea ofhigh endemicity. Patients and Methods Overall, the results of 3349 sera collected during the period 2005-2008 from patients attending the University Hospital of Cagliari, Italy were studied; their mean age was 52.7 years, (s + 16.22). Patients with liver disease were excluded from the study. Age specific seroprevalence results were compared with those observed in similar previous studies carried out in the same area. Results The overall prevalence of anti-HAV was 74.6% with consistently lower values in subjects younger than 40 years (17.5%; P < 0.0001) particularly in those under 30 years of age (8.9%, CI 5.8-11.9). A significant declining trend in age specific seroprevalence has been foundin people under 30 years;61% in 1988, 33% in 1995 and 8.9% in 2005-2008. Conclusions Our findings show that a significant decline inherd immunity has occurred in the last 20 years as a consequence of lower HAV circulation due to improvementsin socio-economical and hygienic conditions. Adolescents and young adults are becoming increasingly susceptible to HAV infections, as recent outbreaks of acute HAV hepatitis have occurred. Persistent environmental monitoring and the implementation of prevention measures must be considered in order to contain the risk related to this epidemiological shift.

To evaluate, through active call, lifestyles of an asymptomatic population in order to identify hyperglycaemic subjects and/or high-blood pressure sufferers to dispatch to their GP to perform suitable checking, and subjects to invite to a cardiovascular disease prevention programme because of their lifestyles.Between April 2011 and March 2013, all healthy residents in 6 Local Health Authorities of Regione Veneto aged 45-59 years were invited to join a cardiovascular disease prevention programme.All participants were evaluated through an administered lifestyle questionnaire. Parameters such as blood pressure (BP), glycemia, waist circumference and body mass index were collected and recorded. Participants also received counseling, informational materials on lifestyle and were invited to individual or group health promotion initiatives in relation to personal risk factors.Among the invited, 60.84%(10,346/17,004) adhered. Subjects without risks factors were 23.95%. Subjects with lifestyle risk factors but normal BP and glycemia were 56.59%, while those with altered values for BP and glycemia were 13.9%. The 5.55% of the respondents was not eligible for the study.The results confirmthat a preventive programme based on the citizens active call by the Department of prevention could be an effective tool to identify asymptomatic individuals with unknown hypertension and/or hyperglycaemia and to offer lifestyle interventions to lower the risk of cardiovascular diseases. Since the results were positive, the the Regional Veneto Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (CCMR - Veneto) presented a similar project to the Ministry of Health, involving 12 Italian Regions.

BACKGROUND Viral hepatitis caused by hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a leading cause of acute and chronic liver diseases worldwide. OBJECTIVES In Italy, a mandatory vaccination policy was introduced in 1991 and was established for all newborns and 12-year-old individuals. In 2004, vaccination of 12-year old adolescents was discontinued, and that of infants was maintained. PATIENTS AND METHODS We evaluated the seroprevalence of HBV markers in 806 individuals, who were vaccinated at birth or at 12 years of age, to assess the effectiveness of the national policy against HBV. RESULTS The overall prevalence of anti-HBs antibodies was 90.32% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88.28-92.36%); 2.23% (95% CI: 1.21-3.25%) of the subjects were positive for both antibodies to HBsAg (anti-HBs) and antibodies to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc), whereas 5.83% (95% CI 4.21-7.45) of the subjects were negative for all markers tested. Further, 1.61% (95% CI: 0.74-2.48%) of the subjects were positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). CONCLUSIONS Our data provide additional evidence that HBV vaccination can confer long-term immunity when performed at birth and when performed for healthy adolescents; moreover, the results show the effectiveness of the application of a national vaccination strategy.

evaluate, through active call, lifestyles of an asymptomatic population in order to identify hyperglycaemic subjects and/or high-blood pressure sufferers to dispatch to their GP to perform suitable checking, and subjects to invite to a cardiovascular disease prevention programme because of their lifestyles.between January 2009 and July 2012, all healthy residents in the Local Health Authority of Este (ULSS 17 Este) aged 45-59 years were invited to join a cardiovascular disease prevention programme.all participants were evaluated through an administered lifestyle questionnaire. Parameters such as blood pressure (BP), glycaemia, waist circumference and body mass index were collected and recorded. Participants also received counseling, informational materials on lifestyle and were invited to individual or group health promotion initiatives in relation to personal risk factors.among the invited, 55.5% (3,922/7,071) adhered. Women (58.8%) responded significantly better than men (51.9%) (p0,01). Subjects without risks factors were 16.7%. Subjects with lifestyle risk factors but normal BP and glycaemia were 49.4%, while those adding altered values for BP and glycaemia were 25.2%. The 8.6% of the respondents were not eligible for the study.the preliminary results suggest that a preventive programme based on the citizens active call by the Department of Prevention could be an effective tool to identify asymptomatic individuals with unknown hypertension and/or hyperglycaemia and to offer lifestyle interventions to lower the risk of cardiovascular diseases.

Immunisation is one of the most important and cost- effective interventions in Public Health because of their significant positive impact on population health.However, since Jenner's discovery there always been a lively debate between supporters and opponents of vaccination; Today the antivaccination movement spreads its message mostly on the web, disseminating inaccurate data through blogs and forums, increasing vaccine rejection.In this context, the Società Italiana di Igiene (SItI) created a web project in order to fight the misinformation on the web regarding vaccinations, through a series of information tools, including scientific articles, educational information, video and multimedia presentations The web portal (http://www.vaccinarsi.org) was published in May 2013 and now is already available over one hundred web pages related to vaccinations Recently a Forum, a periodic newsletter and a Twitter page have been created. There has been an average of 10,000 hits per month. Currently our users are mostly healthcare professionals. The visibility of the site is very good and it currently ranks first in the Google's search engine, taping the word "vaccinarsi" The results of the first four months of activity are extremely encouraging and show the importance of this project; furthermore the application for quality certification by independent international Organizations has been submitted.

OBJECTIVES:The increasingly widespread use of the Internet by the population to collect information regarding health and medical treatments and the circulation of many non-scientific documents on the effectiveness and safety of vaccines has led the Italian Society of Hygiene (SItI), in 2013, to promote a portal to provide scientific information that is verified and easily understood to counteract the rampant misinformation on health treatments and combat the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy.METHODS:The project was launched in May 2013 and provides a portal with six main sections (vaccine preventable diseases, registered vaccines, benefits and risks of vaccination, against misinformation, pros & cons and travel immunizations) and other headings that relate to scientific events, comics and news coverage concerning vaccines. The contents are validated and evaluated by a scientific committee of high profile scientists and experts in computer-mediated communication.RESULTS:In the first two years of activity, the portal has published more than 250 web pages on all aspects related to vaccinations. The number of individual users was 860,411, with a constant increase over time. Of these, about 21.7% returned to the website at least once. The total visits in 24 months were 1,099,670, with a total page count of 2,530,416. The frequency of contact was almost exclusively Italian (95.6%), with a higher proportion of males (54.1%) and younger age groups (25-34 years, 33.5%, and1 8-24 years, 27.5%). The data also show a significant position of the website in the major web search engines. The website has been certified by the Health On the Net Foundation. It is connected with the main social networks and it has recently opened its first regional section (Veneto).CONCLUSIONS:The strong, progressive increase in web contacts, the involvement of several institutional bodies, and the appreciation of various stakeholders give an absolutely positive assessment of the first two years of the VaccinarSì project. The success of the website suggests future developments, with updates, sections devoted to regional problems, in-depth news analysis, and international expansion. The authors conclude that initiatives like this are to be implemented and constitute an effective way to counteract vaccine hesitancy.