(1) Background: Health workers (HWs) are at high risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2) infections. Therefore, health authorities further recommend screening strategies for SARS-CoV-2 infection in exposed or high-risk HWs. Nevertheless, to date, the best/optimal method to screen HWs for SARS-CoV-2 infection is still under debate, and data on the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in HWs are still scarce. The present study aims to assess the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate amongst HWs in a teaching hospital in Central Italy and the diagnostic performance of SARS-CoV-2 serology (index test) in comparison with the SARS-CoV-2 RNA PCR assay (reference standard). (2) Methods: A cross-sectional study on the retrospective data of HWs tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RNA-RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs and by an IgM/IgG serology assay on venous blood samples, irrespective of exposure and/or symptoms, was carried out. (3) Results: A total of 2057 HWs (median age 46, 19–69 years, females 60.2%) were assessed by the RNA RT-PCR assay and 58 (2.7%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Compared with negative HWs, SARS-CoV-2-positives were younger (mean age 41.7 versus 45.2, p < 0.01; 50% versus 31% under or equal to 40 years old, p < 0.002) and had a shorter duration of employment (64 versus 125 months, p = 0.02). Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was more frequent in positive HWs than in negatives (55.2% versus 27.5%, p < 0.0001). In 44.8% of positive HWs, no exposure was traced. None of the positive HWs had a fatal outcome, none of them had acute respiratory distress syndrome, and only one required hospitalization for mild/moderate pneumonia. In 1084 (51.2%) HWs, nasopharyngeal swabs and an IgM/IgG serology assay were performed. With regard to IgM serology, sensitivity was 0% at a specificity of 98.99% (positive predictive value, PPV 0%, negative predictive value, NPV 99.2%). Concerning IgG serology and irrespective of the time interval between nasopharyngeal swab and serology, sensitivity was 50% at a specificity of 99.1% (PPV 28.6%, NPV 99.6%). IgG serology showed a higher diagnostic performance when performed at least two weeks after testing SARS-CoV-2-positive at the RNA RT-PCR assay by a nasopharyngeal swab. (4) Conclusions: Our experience in Central Italy demonstrated a low prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst HWs, but higher than in the general population. Nearly half of the positive HWs reported no previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2-infected subjects and were diagnosed thanks to the proactive screening strategy implemented. IgG serology seems useful when performed at least two weeks after an RNA RT-PCR assay. IgM serology does not seem to be a useful test for the diagnosis of active SARS-CoV-2 infection. High awareness of SARS-CoV-2 infection is mandatory for all people, but especially for HWs, irrespective of symptoms, to safeguard their health and that of patients.

The quality of the sex life in patients with endometriosis and dyspareunia showed significant improvement 6 months after laparoscopic treatment. In view of the diagnostic delay characterizing this disease and confirmed by our results, it is essential to involve a multidisciplinary team to assess all the signs and symptoms of endometriosis that may appear in a women of fertile age. This clinical approach is able to ensure a treatment that is as personalized as possible and an appropriate follow-up also with the objective of preserving reproductive performance.

Increasingly, mental health and medical professionals have been asked to assess claims of psychological harm arising from harassment at the workplace, or "mobbing." This study assessed the personality and psychopathological profiles of 146 individuals exposed to mobbing using validity, clinical, and content scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2. Profiles and factor analyses were obtained. Two major dimensions emerged among those exposed to mobbing: (a) depressed mood, difficulty in making decisions, change-related anguish, and passive-aggressive traits (b) somatic symptoms, and need for attention and affection. This cross-sectional pilot study provides evidence that personality profiles of mobbing victims and psychological damage resulting from mobbing may be evaluated using standardized assessments, though a longitudinal study is needed to delineate cause-and-effect relationships.

Health care workers (HCW) are particularly at risk of acquiring tuberculosis (TB), even in countries with low TB incidence. Therefore, TB screening in HCW is a useful prevention strategy in countries with both low and high TB incidence. Tuberculin skin test (TST) is widely used although it suffers of low specificity; on the contrary, the in vitro enzyme immunoassay tests (IGRA) show superior specificity and sensitivity but are more expensive. The present study reports the results of a three-year TB surveillance among HCW in a large teaching hospital in Rome, using TST (by standard Mantoux technique) and IGRA (by QuantiFERON-TB) as first- and second-level screening tests, respectively. Out of 2290 HCW enrolled, 141 (6.1%) had a positive TST; among them, 99 (70.2%) underwent the IGRA and 16 tested positive (16.1%). The frequency of HCW tested positive for TB seems not far from other experiences in low incidence countries. Our results confirm the higher specificity of IGRA, but, due to its higher cost, TST can be considered a good first level screening test, whose positive results should be further confirmed by IGRA before the patients undergo X-ray diagnosis and/or chemotherapy.

Objectives Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is highly contagious; gastrointestinal endoscopies are considered risky procedures for the endoscopy staff. Data on the SARS-CoV-2-exposure/infection rate of gastrointestinal endoscopy staff is scarce. This study aimed to assess the SARS-CoV-2-exposure/infection rate among gastrointestinal endoscopists/nurses performing gastrointestinal endoscopies before and after the adoption of specific prevention measures. Patients and methods Cross-sectional study in a teaching hospital (Rome, Central Italy) on retrospective data (9 March–15 April 2020) of consecutive gastrointestinal endoscopies, characteristics of procedures, patients and endoscopy staff, SARS-CoV-2-exposure/positivity of patients and staff before and after adoption of prevention measures. Exposed staff tested for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal swabs(RNA-PCR) and serology. Results A total of 130 gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed in 130 patients (age 66 ± 14 years, 51% women, 51% inpatients, 56.9% lower). A total of 12 (9.2%) patients were SARS-CoV-2-positive and 14(10.8%) had a high risk of potential infection. Of the endoscopy staff (n = 16, 5 endoscopists, 8 nurses and 3 residents), 14 (87.5%) were exposed to SARS-CoV-2-infected and 16 (100%) to potentially infected patients. 3/5 and 5/5 endoscopists were exposed to actual and potential, 1/3 and 3/3 residents to actual and potential and 8/8 nurses to actual and potential infection, respectively. None of the staff was found to be infected with SARS-CoV-2. None experienced fever or any other suspicious symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019. Before the adoption of prevention measures, more endoscopists/nurses were in the endoscopy room than after (3.5 ± 0.6 vs. 2.1 ± 0.3, P < 0.0001). Conclusions Despite supposed high infection risk, gastrointestinal endoscopies may be safe for the endoscopy staff during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.