Most vaccinations are recommended within the 15th month of life, in order to reduce risks and to protect children from the initial stages of their lives. A vaccination training session was carried out during the birthing preparation course, aimed at increasing the attitude toward vaccination in maternal-child age. A questionnaire on vaccination awareness was administered before and after the training session and on-site flu vaccination was offered to women and their companions. The percentage of participants who consider the preparatory course a useful tool to obtain information about vaccines increases significantly from 30.34% at pre-intervention to 64.56% at post-intervention (p < 0.001). There is a significant increase in the mean number of vaccinations that the participants want their children to get. The number of participants believing that there is no relationship between vaccination and autism rose from 41.05 to 72.97% (p < 0.001). In total, 48 out of 119 (40.34%) pregnant women participating in the course and 39 companions were vaccinated for influenza. Vaccination knowledge and attitude significantly increased after a training session dedicated to vaccination as a part of the pregnant pre-birth course, whose aim can be therefore extended to the management of the health of the child, well beyond the period of pregnancy, according to the life-course approach to health.
Seasonal flu vaccination is one of the most important strategies for preventing influenza. The attitude towards flu vaccination in light of the COVID-19 pandemic has so far been studied in the literature mostly with the help of surveys and questionnaires. Whether a person chooses to be vaccinated or not during the COVID-19 pandemic, however, speaks louder than any declaration of intention. In our teaching hospital, we registered a statistically significant increase in flu vaccination coverage across all professional categories between the 2019/2020 and the 2020/2021 campaign (24.19% vs. 54.56%, p < 0.0001). A linear regression model, based on data from four previous campaigns, predicted for the 2020/2021 campaign a total flu vaccination coverage of 30.35%. A coverage of 54.46% was, instead, observed, with a statistically significant difference from the predicted value (p < 0.0001). The COVID-19 pandemic can, therefore, be considered as an incentive that significantly and dramatically increased adherence to flu vaccination among our healthcare workers.
Flu vaccination is recommended among healthcare workers (HCWs). The low vaccination coverage registered in our hospital among HCWs called for new engaging approaches to improve flu vaccination coverage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of different strategies implemented during the last four years (2015–2019). A quasi-experimental study was conducted, involving almost 4000 HCWs each year. Starting from the 2015–2016 campaign, new evidence-based strategies were progressively implemented. At the end of each campaign, an evaluation of the vaccination coverage rate reached was performed. Moreover, during the last three campaigns, differences in coverage among job category, wards involved or not in on-site vaccination (OSV) intervention, age classes and gender were analyzed. An increasing flu vaccination coverage rate was registered, from 6% in 2015–2016 to almost 22% at the end of 2018–2019. The overall number of vaccinated HCWs increased, especially at younger ages. OSV strategy always leads to better results, and physicians always show a higher vaccination coverage than nurses and other HCWs. The implemented strategies were effective in achieving higher flu vaccination coverage among HCWs in our hospital and therefore can be considered valuable examples of good prevention practices in hospital settings.
Healthcare-associated infections (HAI) represent one of the most common cause of infection and an important burden of disease. The aim of this study was to analyze the results of a six-year HAI point prevalence survey carried out yearly in a teaching acute care hospital from 2013 to 2018, following the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) guidelines. Surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, bloodstream infections, pneumonia, meningitis, and Clostridium difficile infections were considered as risk factors. A total of 328 patients with HAI were detected during the 6-year survey, with an average point prevalence of 5.24% (95% CI: 4.70%–5.83%). Respiratory tract infections were the most common, followed by surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, primary bloodstream infections, Clostridium difficile infections, and central nervous system infections. A regression model showed length of stay at the moment of HAI detection, urinary catheter, central venous catheter, and antibiotic therapy to be the most important predictors of HAI prevalence, yielding a significant adjusted coefficient of determination (adjusted R2) of 0.2780. This will provide future infection control programs with specific HAI to focus on in order to introduce a proper prophylaxis and to limit exposure whenever possible.
PurposeThe aim of the present study was to compare two clinical pathways: the multiple-access outpatient pathway versus the telemedicine pathway. Methods The multiple-access outpatient pathway and the telemedicine pathway were both performed with WatchPAT and implemented in a real-life healthcare scenario, adopting a cost-minimization approach. A cost-minimization analysis was undertaken to assess the economic impact of the two alternatives. The cost analyses were performed in euros for the year 2021 adopting the patient, the hospital, and the societal perspectives. Given the chosen perspectives, direct medical costs, direct nonmedical costs, and indirect costs were considered. In addition, a univariate sensitivity analysis was conducted. Results From a hospital perspective, the telemedicine approach was estimated to cost €49 more than the multiple-access alternative. Considering the patient perspective, the telemedicine approach was estimated to cost €167 less than the multipleaccess pathway. Considering the societal perspective, the telemedicine approach is estimated to cost €119 less than the multiple-access pathway. ConclusionThe adoption of telemedicine home sleep apnea testing could improve the efficiency of the healthcare processes if considering the direct and indirect costs incurred by patients and not only by healthcare providers.
Background: The World Health Organization identified alcohol and tobacco consumption as the risk factors with a greater attributable burden and number of deaths related to non-communicable diseases. A promising technique aimed to modify behavioral risk factors by redesigning the elements influencing the choice of people is nudging. Methodology: A scoping review of the literature was performed to map the literature evidence investigating the use of nudging for tobacco and alcohol consumption prevention and/or control in adults. Results: A total of 20 studies were included. The identified nudging categories were increasing salience of information or incentives (IS), default choices (DF), and providing feedback (PF). Almost three-quarters of the studies implementing IS and half of those implementing PF reported a success. Three-quarters of the studies using IS in conjunction with other interventions reported a success whereas more than half of the those with IS alone reported a success. The PF strategy performed better in multi-component interventions targeting alcohol consumption. Only one DF mono-component study addressing alcohol consumption reported a success. Conclusions: To achieve a higher impact, nudging should be integrated into comprehensive prevention policy frameworks, with dedicated education sessions for health professionals. In conclusion, nudge strategies for tobacco and alcohol consumption prevention in adults show promising results. Further research is needed to investigate the use of nudge strategies in socio-economically diverse groups and in young populations.
Background: The introduction of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors (CDK4/6i) was a great advance in therapeutics for patients with estrogen receptor+/human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer. Despite the increasing use of these agents, their adverse drug-related events have not yet been fully characterized. We describe the spectrum of cutaneous adverse reactions occurring in advanced breast cancer patients treated with cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors, analyzing types, severity, time to onset, and possible treatment outcomes. Methods: We performed a multicentric retrospective study including patients with advanced breast cancer who developed cutaneous lesions during treatment with CDK4/6i in the period from June 2020 to June 2021. Patients > 18 years were recruited at eleven onco-dermatology units located in Albania (1), Argentina (1), France (1), Greece (3), Italy (3), and Spain (2). We evaluated patients’ epidemiological and clinical characteristics, types of cutaneous adverse events, their time to onset, and treatment outcomes. The severity of the skin reactions was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0 score. Results: Seventy-nine patients (median age: 62.3 years; range 39–83 years) were included in the study, and, collectively, we recorded a total of 165 cutaneous adverse events during follow-up visits. The most frequent cutaneous reactions were pruritus (49/79 patients), alopecia (25/79), and eczematous lesions (24/79). Cutaneous toxicities were usually mild in severity (>65%) and occurred after a median of 6.5 months. Only four patients (5%) required treatment discontinuation due to the severity of the skin lesions. The majority of the skin reactions were managed with topical treatments. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, we present the largest case series of cutaneous adverse events developing in advanced breast cancer patients treated with CDK4/6i. We showed that cutaneous toxicities are usually mild in severity, and manageable with standard supportive care; however, in selected cases, they can lead to treatment discontinuation with possible implications for patients’ clinical outcomes.
In several hospitals worldwide, healthcare workers are currently at the forefront against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Since Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli (FPG) IRCCS has been enlisted as a COVID hospital, healthcare workers deployed to COVID wards were separated from those with limited or no exposure, whereas administrative staff was destined to work-from-home. Between June 4 and July 3 2020, an investigation was carried out to evaluate seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies among employees of the FPG using point-of-care (POC) and venous blood tests. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were determined with reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on nasal/oropharyngeal swabs as gold standard.Four thousand, seven hundred seventy-seven participants were enrolled. Seroprevalence was 3.66% using the POC test and 1.19% using venous blood test, with a significant difference between the two (p < 0.05).POC sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 63.64% (95% confidence interval (CI): 62.20% to 65.04%) and 96.64% (95% CI: 96.05% to 97.13%), while those of the venous blood test were, respectively, 78.79% (95% CI: 77.58% to 79.94%) and 99.36% (95% CI: 99.07% to 99.55%). Among low-risk population, point-of-care’s predictive values were 58.33% (positive) and 98.23% (negative) whereas venous blood test’s were 92.86% (positive) and 98.53% (negative). In conclusion, point-of-care tests have low diagnostic accuracy, while venous blood tests seem to show an overall poor reliability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.