Evidence shows that a substantial proportion of patients with COVID-19 experiences long-term consequences of the disease, but the predisposing factors are poorly understood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify factors present during COVID-19 hospitalization associated with an increased risk of exhibiting new or persisting symptoms (Post-COVID-19 Syndrome, PCS). MedLine and WebOfScience were last searched on 30 September 2021. We included English language clinical trials and observational studies investigating prognostic factors for PCS in adults previously hospitalized for COVID-19, reporting at least one individual prospective follow-up of minimum 12 weeks. Two authors independently assessed risk of bias, which was judged generally moderate. Risk factors were included in the analysis if their association with PCS was investigated by at least two studies. To summarize the prognostic effect of each factor (or group of factors), odds ratios were estimated using raw data. Overall, 20 articles met the inclusion criteria, involving 13,340 patients. Associations were statistically significant for two factors: female sex with any symptoms (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.27–1.82), with mental health symptoms (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.21–2.29) and with fatigue (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.32–1.79); acute disease severity with respiratory symptoms (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.03–2.68). The I² statistics tests were calculated to quantify the degree of study heterogeneity. This is the first meta-analysis measuring the association between factors present during COVID-19 hospitalization and long-term sequelae. The role of female sex and acute disease severity as independent prognostic factors must be confirmed in robust longitudinal studies with longer follow-up. Identifying populations at greatest risk for PCS can enable the development of targeted prevention and management strategies. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021253467.

BackgroundOver 20% of hospital bed use is inappropriate, implying a waste of resources and the increase of patient iatrogenic risk.MethodsThis is a cluster, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial, carried out in a large University Hospital of Northern Italy, aiming to evaluate the effect of a strategy to reduce unnecessary hospital days. The primary outcome was the percentage of patient-days compatible with discharge. Among secondary objectives, to describe the strategy’s effect in the long-term, as well as on hospital readmissions, considered to be a marker of the quality of hospital care. The 12 medical wards with the longest length of stay participated. Effectiveness was measured at the individual level on 3498 eligible patients during monthly index days. Patients admitted or discharged on index days, or with stay >90 days, were excluded. All ward staff was blinded to the index days, while staff in the control arm and data analysts were blinded to the trial’s objectives and interventions. The strategy comprised the distribution to physicians of the list of their patients whose hospital stay was compatible with discharge according to a validated Delay Tool, and of physician length of stay profiles, followed by audits managed autonomously by the physicians of the ward.ResultsDuring the 12 months of data collection, over 50% of patient-days were judged to be compatible with discharge. Delays were mainly due to problems with activities under medical staff control. Multivariate analysis considering clustering showed that the strategy reduced patient-days compatible with discharge by 16% in the intervention vs control group, (OR=0.841; 95% CI, 0.735 to 0.963; P=0.012). Follow-up at 1 year did not yield a statistically significant difference between the percentages of patient-days judged to be compatible with discharge between the two arms (OR=0.818; 95% CI, 0.476 to 1.405; P=0.47). There was no significant difference in 30-day readmission and mortality rates for all eligible patients (N=3498) between the two arms.ConclusionsResults indicate that a strategy, involving physician direct accountability, can reduce unnecessary hospital days. Relatively simple interventions, like the one assessed in this study, should be implemented in all hospitals with excessive lengths of stay, since unnecessary prolongation may be harmful to patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01422811.

BackgroundNegative variation in the management of patients with the same clinical condition is frequent, and affects quality of care. Recent studies indicate that single interventions are not an effective solution. We aim to demonstrate that a multifaceted strategy can favor the introduction of research into practice, and to assess its long-term effects on a set of common medical conditions exhibiting significant negative variation at our institution.MethodsThe strategy, devised and agreed upon by a multidisciplinary group, was first applied to one relevant medical condition – cerebral ischemic stroke. To test its effectiveness a quasi-experimental study was conducted, comparing an intervention group with historical controls. After validation the strategy was extended to other pathologies, and its long-term effect measured using evidence-based quality indicators. Adherence to each indicator was determined prospectively on a six-month basis for a period of at least two consecutive years. Measures are expressed as proportions with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsValidation findings demonstrated that the strategy improved compliance with scientific evidence: the percentage of patients who received a CT scan within 24 hours of hospital presentation rose from 56% to 75%, (χ2 = 7.43 p < 0.01); admissions to selected wards increased from 45% to 64%, (χ2 = 7.81 p < 0.01); the number of physical medicine visits within 24 hours of the request grew from 59% to 91% (χ2 = 14,40 p < 0.001). Over a four-year period the program was gradually applied to 14 medical conditions. Except for 3 cases, compliance with the pathway, i.e. number of eligible patients for whom data on the care process is collected, was above the minimum requirement of 75%. Indicator adherence generally exhibited a positive trend, though variability was observed both among different conditions and between different semesters for the same pathology.ConclusionAccording to our experience, incorporation of research into practice can be favored by systematically applying a shared, multifaceted strategy, involving multidisciplinary teams supported by central coordination. Institutions should device a tailor-made approach, should train personnel on implementation strategies, and create cultural acceptance of change. Just like for experimental trials, human and economic resources should be allocated within health care services to allow the achievement of this objective.

BackgroundQuestion Prompt Lists (QPLs) have proven very effective in encouraging cancer patients to ask questions, allowing them to take up a more active role during visits with the oncologist. As no such tool has yet been validated for Italian-speaking users, we carried out the cross-cultural adaptation and evaluation of an existing Australian Question Prompt List.MethodsCross-cultural adaptation was performed in accordance with the five steps described by Guillemin and Beaton. Forward and back translations of the original tool were carried out, and the products discussed by an Expert Committee who agreed on a prefinal version of the Italian QPL, which was submitted to 30 volunteer patients for evaluation. They rated each question's adequacy of content, clarity of wording, usefulness, and generated anxiety, on a 3-point Likert scale. Based on the analysis of patient ratings, the final version of the Italian QPL was produced.ResultsFew discrepancies between the two back translations and the original version of the instrument were noted, indicating that the Italian translation (synthesis of the 2 forward translations) was substantially accurate. Most volunteer patients felt that the questionnaire was adequate, easy to understand and useful. Only a few minor criticisms were expressed. Certain questions on diagnosis and prognosis generated the highest level of anxiety. Patient comments and ratings on clarity highlighted the need to clarify common health care terms which are not widely used by the public (i.e. guideline, multidisciplinary team and clinical trial)ConclusionsThis cross-cultural adaptation has produced an Italian Question Prompt List that is now available for multi-center international studies and can be safely used with Italian-speaking cancer patients.

This is the first cluster randomized trial aiming to demonstrate that a structured modality of providing information reduces psychological distress. We did not find this, but we believe results should be interpreted cautiously, particularly because of the low compliance with PIS implementation. Context analysis preceding such interventions is essential.

Our findings demonstrate that evidence-based interventions to improve the psychosocial care of people with cancer can be implemented in a diverse range of oncology wards. This requires the involvement and motivation of the entire staff of the ward, support by an expert team, and promotion by policymakers.

A common European model should be developed, defining EC functions, member selection modalities, necessary member competences, decision-making criteria and measures for work verification. In the absence of sound empirical evidence, it would be interesting to study the effectiveness and efficiency of the different existing models.

IntroductionNursing home residents represent a particularly vulnerable population experiencing high risk of unplanned hospital admissions, but few interventions have proved effective in reducing this risk. The aim of this research will be to verify the effects of a hospital-based multidisciplinary mobile unit (MMU) team intervention delivering urgent care to nursing home residents directly at their bedside.Methods and analysisFour nursing homes based in the Parma province, in Northern Italy, will be involved in this prospective, pragmatic, multicentre, 18-month quasiexperimental study (sequential design with two cohorts). The residents of two nursing homes will receive the MMU team care intervention. In case of urgent care needs, the nursing home physician will contact the hospital physician responsible for the MMU team by phone. The case will be triaged as (a) manageable by phone advice, (b) requiring urgent assessment by the MMU team or (c) requiring immediate emergency department (ED) referral. MMU team is composed of one senior physician and one emergency-medicine resident chosen within the staff of Internal Medicine and Critical Subacute Care Unit of Parma University-Hospital, usually with different specialty background, and equipped with portable ultrasound, set of drugs and devices useful in urgency. The MMU visits patients in nursing homes, with the mission to stabilise clinical conditions and avoid hospital admission. Residents of the other two nursing homes will receive usual care, that is, ED referral in every case of urgency. Study endpoints include unplanned hospital admissions (primary), crude all-cause mortality, hospital mortality, length of stay and healthcare-related costs (secondary).Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Area Vasta Emilia Nord (Emilia-Romagna region). Informed consent will be collected from patients or legal representatives. The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations, in compliance with the Italian law.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT 04085679); Pre-results.