Search

• Worldwide, the 61% of all healthcare workers agree with mandatory flu vaccination. • Great heterogeneity exists, with differences between continents and professionals. • Vaccinated healthcare workers agree more frequently with mandatory flu vaccination. • Few studies investigate mandatory vaccination agreement as the main outcome. Influenza is a disease responsible for thousands of deaths every year. Although healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a way of contagion for patients, vaccination coverage among them is low. Mandatory vaccination has been proposed, but controversies remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the acceptance of mandatory vaccination by HCWs, and to investigate associated characteristics. MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science were used to search for studies assessing the topic. PRISMA statements were followed. Of the 13,457 univocal records found, 52 studies were included in the systematic review and 40 in the meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of HCWs accepting the policy was of 61% (95% CI: 53%- 68%) but with great heterogeneity between continents (from 54% in Europe to 69% in Asia) and in different professionals (from 40% in nurses to 80% in students). Vaccinated HCWs agreed more frequently with mandatory vaccination than non-vaccinated ones. More studies that consider mandatory vaccination acceptance as the main outcome are needed, but the results of this study confirm that in some settings the majority of HCWs favour mandatory vaccination. This, combined with effects that a flu epidemic could have if overlapped to pandemics with similar symptoms, requires renewed considerations on mandatory vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Four percent of the world's population suffers from depression, which is a major public health issue. Medical students are at risk, as their depressive symptoms (DS) prevalence is reported to be approximately 27% worldwide. Since few data on Italian medical students exist, this study aimed to estimate their DS prevalence and assess risk and protective factors. Methods: The PRIMES was a multicentre cross-sectional study performed in 12 Italian medical schools. Questionnaires were self-reported and included 30 sociodemographic items and the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). The primary outcome was the presence of DS (BDI-II score≥14). The main analyses were chi-squared tests and multivariable logistic regressions with a p-value<0.05 considered significant. Results: The number of collected questionnaires was 2,513 (117 BDI-II incomplete). Females accounted for 61.3% of the respondents, and the median age was 22 years (IQR = 4). The prevalence of DS was 29.5%. Specifically, 14.0% had mild depression, 11.1% had moderate depression, and 4.5% had severe depression. The main risk factors for DS were age, being female, bisexual/asexual orientation, living with partner/housemates, poor economic status (worsened by living far from home), less than 90 min of weekly exercise, relatives with psychiatric disorders, personal chronic disease, judging medical school choice negatively, unsatisfying friendships with classmates, competitive and hostile climate among classmates, thinking that medical school hinders specific activities and being worried about not measuring up to the profession. Protective factors included family cohesion, hobbies, intellectual curiosity as a career motivation and no worries about the future. Conclusion: Italian medical students are at high risk of reporting DS, similar to the global population of medical students'. Medical schools must make efforts to implement preventive and treatment interventions by offering counselling and working on modifiable factors, such as lifestyle and learning climate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An excessive control of quality of food can turn into Orthorexia Nervosa (ON). The organic store customers (OSCs) can be apopulation at risk for ON. The aims of this study were to assess ON symptoms prevalence among them, comparing them with non-OSCs and investigate potential predictors of ON. Across-sectional survey was carried among 121 OSCs and 119 non-OSCs. The questionnaire assessed socio-demographic characteristics and investigated current dietary habits. The main outcome measures used were ORTO-15 and Eating Habits Questionnaire (EHQ). Chi-squared analyses were performed to assess differences between groups (OSCs and non-OSCs). Logistic and linear regressions were performed to evaluate potential predictors of ON symptoms and to compare questionnaires. As main results, OSCs had ahigher probability to result positive at ORTO-15 compared to non-OSCs. The prevalence among OSCs was 69.4% and 23.1% (using ORTO-15 with 40 and 35 cut-offs). Higher EHQ scores were reported among OSCs (p < 0.001). Potential predictors were mainly being an OSC or following food restrictions. Predictors varied using different cut-offsof ORTO-15 and EHQ. These results suggest the association between OSCs and ON symptoms. Some differences were found between ORTO-15 and EHQ. Further studies need to be performed to improve diagnostic tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In January 2010, the SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery), under the auspices of the EAES, decided to revisit the clinical recommendations for the role of laparoscopy in abdominal emergencies in adults, with the primary intent being to update the 2006 EAES indications and supplement the existing guidelines on specific diseases. Methods: Other Italian surgical societies were invited into the Consensus to form a panel of 12 expert surgeons. In order to get a multidisciplinary panel, other stakeholders involved in abdominal emergencies were invited along with a patient's association. In November 2010, the panel met in Rome to discuss each chapter according to the Delphi method, producing key statements with a grade of recommendations followed by commentary to explain the rationale and the level of evidence behind the statements. Thereafter, the statements were presented to the Annual Congress of the EAES in June 2011. Results: A thorough literature review was necessary to assess whether the recommendations issued in 2006 are still current. In many cases new studies allowed us to better clarify some issues (such as for diverticulitis, small bowel obstruction, pancreatitis, hernias, trauma), to confirm the key role of laparoscopy (such as for cholecystitis, gynecological disorders, nonspecific abdominal pain, appendicitis), but occasionally previous strong recommendations have to be challenged after review of recent research (such as for perforated peptic ulcer). Conclusions: Every surgeon has to develop his or her own approach, taking into account the clinical situation, her/his proficiency (and the experience of the team) with the various techniques, and the specific organizational setting in which she/he is working. This guideline has been developed bearing in mind that every surgeon could use the data reported to support her/his judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A national audit focused on laparoscopic appendectomy was promoted by the Italian Association of Hospital Surgeons (ACOI). Four-hundred and sixty surgical practices received an e-mail questionnaire. Data concerning epidemiology, timetable, surgeon's age, selection of patients, laparotomic conversion, behaviour in the case of a normal appendix, and technical aspects were investigated. The response rate was 51.7%. The median number of appendectomies performed is 50-100 each year in a surgery ward. Laparoscopic operations are very common (93%), but mostly performed in less than 50% of the observed cases. There is no significant difference between the number of operations during the day vs. at night, and they are performed by a limited (<30%) group of surgeons, equally composed of physicians aged above and below 40. The majority of surgeons adopt an 'all comers' policy regarding laparoscopic appendectomy, including selected older patients (>70 years old). There are no standard indications for conversion, while the behaviour in the presence of a normal appendix is generally removal. Even if laparoscopic appendectomy is not yet considered a gold standard, it is widely diffused in Italy, and the audit's data show different behaviours between subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]