Search

The urgency of having rapidly safe and efficient COVID-19 vaccines called for the need to shorten trial phases, reduce sample sizes, and speed-up the approval process by the regulatory Agencies. In light of this, monitoring adverse effects (AEFI) (both immediate and at medium-long term) become of great importance. Aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore the associations between several factors and risk of immediate AEFI.Data come from the electronic dataset developed ad hoc to record demographic data, anamnesis and data related to immunization, set-up in the mass vaccination site in Novegro (Milan). Novegro mass vaccination site was one of the mass vaccinations sites with the highest flow in Lombardy Region, with a maximum capacity of 5,000 vaccinations/day. The center opened in April 2021 and closed the 1st of August 2021. A multivariable logistic regression model was used. Odds ratios adjusted (aOR) for age and sex are presented. Statistical significance was set at p0.05. Analyses were conducting using STATA.Among the total of 314,671 subjects vaccinated, 0.5% developed an immediate AEFI, on average 17.0 ± 0.43 minutes after the administration. The three most frequent AEFI recorded were vagal response (30%), anxiety reaction (24%) and dizziness (21%). AEFI were more frequently observed among women [aOR= 2.24 (95%CI= 2.00 - 2.50)], and those with at least one previous disease [aOR= 1.47 (95%CI= 1.22-1.76)].In conclusion, AEFI were less likely to occur for increasing age and after the second dose. Results from this large, complete and representative sample population regarding enrich the interesting scientific debate on potential adverse events following COVID-19 immunization.

Diabetic patients are at higher risk of developing infectious diseases and severe complications, compared to the general population. Almost no data is available in the literature on influenza immunization in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). As part of a broader project on immunization in diabetic patients, we conducted a cross-sectional study to: (i) report on seasonal influenza coverage rates in T1DM patients, (ii) explore knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) towards seasonal influenza in this population, and (iii) identify factors associated with vaccine uptake, including the role of family doctors and diabetologists. A survey was administered to 251 T1DM patients attending the Diabetes Clinic at San Raffaele Research Hospital in Milan, Italy and individual-level coverage data were retrieved from immunization registries. Self-reported seasonal influenza immunization coverage was 36%, which decreased to 21.7% when considering regional immunization registries, far below coverage target of 75%. More than a third (36.2%) of T1DM patients were classified as pro-vaccine, 30.7% as hesitant, 17.9% as uninformed, and 15.1% as anti-vaccine. Diabetologists resulted to be the most trusted source of information on vaccines’ benefits and risks (85.3%) and should be more actively involved in preventive interventions. Our study highlights the importance of developing tailored vaccination campaigns for people with diabetes, including hospital-based programs involving diabetes specialists.

Issue Following the SARS-Cov-2 outbreak in Wuhan, China, the first case of COVID-19 was reported in Codogno, Lombardy, Italy, on 20 February 2020. The ongoing epidemic has exposed the health care system to a severe stress. San Raffaele Hospital (OSR) in Milan, Italy - a leader in the emergency management, may provide a benchmarking experience useful for other countries. Description of the Problem OSR has established a task force including the health care director, the Infections Prevention and Control Committee (IPCC) and the head of ward and outpatients' facilities management area in order to assess the situation and to define a multi-step strategy. The management process has been divided in two steps. Firstly, a preventive phase was devised, in a preparedness perspective, to avoid the spread of the infection to the Healthcare Professionals (HCP). Secondly, a reorganizational phase was implemented to guarantee assistance to infected patients, especially the critical ones. Results Before the outbreak, the IPCC updated OSR's procedures, based on the WHO's, national and regional guidance, planned a lectures series and an online survey to train healthcare professionals and proposed to stack Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to face the expected shortage. The Head of the facilities management area defined separate pathways in the Emergency Department in order to isolate patients with respiratory symptoms, set up a new ward, with 26 beds and dedicated personnel, as well as two Intensive Care Units, with 13 beds, Some wards were merged and more healthcare workers were moved to the COVID-19 units. Lessons The coordination between task force members has been crucial for translating the multi-step strategy in a quick reorganization of the whole hospital. Despite early preparations, we could not anticipate the evolution of the outbreak and its logistic impact, especially on the PPE procurement. Key messages A major Hospital was proved to be capable to respond to the changing healthcare requests. Organizational flexibility is crucial for proper emergency management.

Background During infectious disease emergencies, fully aware healthcare workers (HCWs) and public services staff are unique resources to keep health systems active and tackle epidemics. Aim of the study was to assess concern, general and health-related knowledge (case management and Infection Prevention and Control [IPC] measures) among hospital staff on SARS-CoV-2 in Lombardy region (Italy). Methods One week after WHO declared COVID-19 a public health emergency we developed and online administered a 7-item questionnaire to all staff of San Raffaele Hospital, a referral and teaching hospital in Milan, exploring knowledge and attitudes on COVID-19. The survey remained accessible online for 72 hours. Results A total of 2,046, including HCWs and other staff, answered the survey (response rate 25%). Among the 2,027 responders included in the analysis, 1,102 were HCWs (54%), also in training, and 924 non-HCWs (46%). 60% of responders reported being worried or extremely worried about the epidemic. Concerning knowledge, the survey asked about modes of transmission, clinical forms, preventive measures in everyday life in Italy and cough etiquette. There were uniform trends in the two groups: HCWs were more aware and answered more properly (mean of correct answers 71,6%) than non-HCWs (mean 61,2%). HCWs were asked about IPC precautions, with only 41% providing correct answers, while over 74% knew only supportive therapy is currently available against COVID-19. Conclusions We were among the first to explore hospital staff knowledge on COVID-19 reporting data from a large study population. HCWs were slightly less concerned but more knowledgeable than general staff. Last questions showed that among HCWs there is generally good knowledge on the topic. However, most of the responders missed the recommendations to adopt simultaneously standard, contact and airborne precautions plus eye protection managing suspected and confirmed cases, as proposed by national and international authorities. Key messages During the ongoing emergency, it is of utmost importance that hospital staff is adequately trained to implement the best IPC measures and limit the spread of the infection. Our data can inform planning of these preventive measures.

We analyzed the spread of the COVID-19 epidemic in 9 metropolitan regions of the world with similar socio-demographic characteristics, daytime commuting population and business activities: the New York State, Bruxelles-Capital, the Community of Madrid, Catalonia, the Île-de-France Region, the Greater London county, Stockholms län, Hovedstaden (Copenhagen) and the Lombardy Region. The Lombardy region reported the highest COVID-19 crude mortality rate (141.0 x 100,000) 70-days after the onset of the epidemic, followed by the Community of Madrid (132.8 x 100,000) New York State (120.7 x 100,000). The large variation in COVID-19 mortality and case-fatality rates for COVID-19 in different age strata suggested a more accurate analysis and interpretation of the epidemic dynamics after standardization of the rates by age. The share of elder populations (>70 years) over total population varies widely in the considered study settings, ranging from 6.9% in Catalonia to 17.0% in Lombardy. When taking age distribution into consideration the highest standardized mortality rate was observed in the State of New York (257.9 x 100,000); with figures in most of the European regions concentrated between 123.3 x 100,000 in Greater London and 177.7 x 100,000 in Bruxelles-Capital, lower in French and Danish regions. We also report and critical appraise, when available, COVID-19 mortality figures in capital cities, nursing homes, as well as excess mortality at country level. Our data raise awareness on the need for a more in-depth epidemiological analysis of the current COVID-19 public health emergency that further explores COVID-19 mortality determinants associated with health services delivery, community-level healthcare, testing approaches and characteristics of surveillance systems, including classification of COVID-19 deaths. (www.actabiomedica.it)

Digitalisation offers great potential to improve vaccine uptake, supporting the need for effective life-course immunisation services. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with public health experts from 10 Western European countries (Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom) to assess the current level of digitalisation in immunisation programmes and retrieve data on interventions and best practices. Interviews were performed using an ad hoc questionnaire, piloted on a sample of national experts. We report a mixed level of digital technologies deployment within vaccination services across Europe: Some countries are currently developing eHealth strategies, while others have already put in place robust programmes. Institutional websites, educational videos, and electronic immunisation records are the most frequently adopted digital tools. Webinars and dashboards represent valuable resources to train and support healthcare professionals in immunisation services organisation. Text messages, email-based communication, and smartphone apps use is scattered across Europe. The main reported barrier to the implementation of digital-based programmes is the lack of resources and shared standards. Our study offers a comprehensive picture of the European context and shows the need for robust collaboration between states and international institutions to share best practices and inform the planning of digital intervention models with the aim of countering vaccine hesitancy and increasing vaccine uptake.