The seasonal flu vaccine is the most important way to prevent influenza epidemics, so it is useful to increase the awareness of health professionals. The aim of our study is to evaluate knowledge, attitudes, and behavior about flu vaccination among healthcare professionals in times of COVID-19. Methods: A cross sectional study was carried out between November 2020 and April 2021. Participants were recruited in teaching hospital ‘Policlinico Umberto I’ of Rome. A survey of 24 questions about flu vaccination was administered, evaluating their knowledge, attitude, and practice about this topic. Results: 872 healthcare professionals were involved in the study (36.9% men, 63.1% women). More than 90% of the HCWs, especially physicians, recognize the importance of getting influenza vaccination: The main reasons for not getting vaccinated were fear of vaccine side effects (20.3%) and fear of the needle (6.4%). Nevertheless, 40.7% of the healthcare providers consider mandatory vaccination as unethical, especially if they work in low-intensity wards. Conclusion: a high percentage of healthcare workers agree with the importance of influenza vaccination and only a small percentage is still opposed. It is therefore important to continue to promote the influenza vaccination through communication and health education programs.

This study aims to investigate whether HCWs infected with COVID-19 may experience potential psychological consequences and a higher incidence of depression, anxiety, work-related stress, and burnout compared to non-infected HCWs. A case–control study with 774 participants was conducted comparing COVID-19-infected HCWs (cases) and non-infected HCWs (controls) from the Occupational Medicine Unit at the Teaching Hospital Policlinico Umberto I, who were administered the same questionnaire including Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Copenhagen Burnout Inventory and Karasek’s Job Content Questionnaire. No differences in the levels of burnout and decision latitude were found between the two groups. Cases showed higher level of anxiety and job demand compared to controls. In contrast, levels of depression in the case group were significantly lower compared to the control group. The results are indicating the need for workplace health promotion activities based on stress and burnout management and prevention. Multiple organizational and work-related interventions can lower the impact of mental health-related issues in the COVID-19 pandemics, including the improvement of workplace infrastructures, as well as the adoption of correct and shared anti-contagion measures, which must include regular personal protective equipment supply, and the adoption of training programs that deal with mental health-related issues.

Immunization is the best protection against chickenpox, measles and rubella. It is important to identify and immunize susceptible healthcare workers to prevent and control hospital infections. Our aim was to estimate the susceptibility level of healthcare workers at a Teaching Hospital in Rome concerning these diseases and the factors associated to the susceptibility. Methods: a cross sectional study was carried out at the Department of Occupational Medicine of the Umberto I General Hospital of Rome. Participants were recruited during routine occupational health surveillance. As far as inclusion criteria, the following professionals were considered: doctors, nurses, laboratory technicians and other health professionals. Concerning the exclusion criteria, patients with HIV, cancer and diseases of the immune system, and acute illness or fever more than 38.5 °C, were not included in the study. A blood sample was tested for the presence of antibodies against measles, rubella and chicken pox. Results: 1106 healthcare professionals were involved in the study (41.8% nurses, 30.4% doctors, 12.3% laboratory technicians, 15.1% other health professionals): 25 (2.3%), 73 (6.6%) and 35 (3.2%) of these were susceptible to measles, rubella and chicken pox, respectively. The only variable associated with susceptibility of measles was age (p <0.001). Furthermore, there was evidence of an association between various susceptibilities, particularly between measles and chickenpox (OR: 4.38). Conclusion: this study showed that even if the majority of our healthcare professionals are immunized for MRV, it is necessary not to underestimate the seronegativity of non-immune ones. All health professionals should be vaccinated to ensure safety for patients, especially the weakest.

Background: Recommended vaccinations are the cheapest and most effective measure to reduce the risk of transmission and related complications, especially in high-risk healthcare settings. This study aimed to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of HCWs in relation to national recommendations. Methods: A transversal study was conducted through administration of a questionnaire by personal interview. The following care units were involved: Paediatric, Neonatal, Cardiac Surgery and General Intensive Care Units and Infectious Diseases Unit. Results: The study sample comprised 308 HCWs. Half the sample were aware of the vaccination recommendations, with occupation and age found to be predictive factors (OR = 9.38, 95%CI: 2.07–42.41; OR = 0.36, 95%CI: 0.22–0.60). A higher percentage defined the diseases as a risk for their patients’ health, although this perception was lower in the over-40 age group. In several cases, there were statistically significant differences between the care units (p < 0.001). Around three-quarters of the sample agreed that vaccination should be mandatory; willingness to undergo a future booster vaccination was statistically correlated with the variables of age and care unit (p < 0.001, p = 0.03). Conclusion: The protection of health in the workplace can be achieved through some strategic actions, such as the implementation of educational strategies, and protocols for the monitoring of immunocompetence and the improvement of vaccination.

The aim of this study is to assess the effect of contact time, contact distance and the use of personal protective equipment on the determination of SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers (HCWs). This study consists of an analysis of data gathered for safety reasons at the Sapienza Teaching Hospital Policlinico Umberto I in Rome through the surveillance system that was put into place after the worsening of the COVID-19 pandemic. The studied subjects consist of HCWs who were put under health surveillance, i.e., all employees who were in contact with subjects who were confirmed to have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The HCWs under surveillance were monitored for a period encompassing ten days after the date of contact, during which they undertook nasopharyngeal swab tests analysed through RT-PCR (RealStar® SARS-CoV-2 Altona Diagnostic–Germany). Descriptive and univariate analyses have been undertaken, considering the following as risk factors: (a) no personal protective equipment use (PPE); (b) Distance < 1 m between the positive and contact persons; (c) contact time > 15′. Finally, a Cox regression and an analysis of the level of synergism between factors, as specified by Rothman, were carried out. We analysed data from 1273 HCWs. Of these HCWs, 799 (62.8%) were females, with a sample average age of 47.8 years. Thirty-nine (3.1%) tested positive during surveillance. The overall incidence rate was 0.4 per 100 person-days. Time elapsed from the last exposure and a positive RT-PCR result ranged from 2 to 17 days (mean = 7, median = 6 days). In the univariate analysis, a distance <1 m and a contact time > 15′ proved to be risk factors for the SARS-CoV-2 infection, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.62 (95% CI: 1.11–6.19) and 3.59 (95% IC: 1.57–8.21), respectively. The synergism analysis found the highest synergism between the “no PPE use” x “Contact time”. The synergy index S remains strongly positive also in the analysis of the factors “no PPE use” x “Distance” and “Time of contact” x “Distance”. This study confirms the absolute need to implement safety protocols during the pandemic and to use the correct PPE within health facilities in order to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection. The analysis shows that among the factors considered (contact time and distance, no use of PPE), there is a strong synergistic effect.

Background: Since the beginning of the pandemic, five variants of epidemiological interest have been identified, each of them with its pattern of symptomology and disease severity. The aim of this study is to analyze the role of vaccination status in modulating the pattern of symptomatology associated with COVID-19 infection during four waves. Methods: Data from the surveillance activity of healthcare workers were used to carry out descriptive analysis, association analyses and multivariable analysis. A synergism analysis between vaccination status and symptomatology during the waves was performed. Results: Females were found at a higher risk of developing symptoms. Four SARS-CoV-2 waves were identified. Pharyngitis and rhinitis were more frequent during the fourth wave and among vaccinated subjects while cough, fever, flu syndrome, headache, anosmia, ageusia, arthralgia/arthritis and myalgia were more frequent during the first three waves and among unvaccinated subjects. A correlation was found between vaccination and the different waves in terms of developing pharyngitis and rhinitis. Conclusion: Vaccination status and viruses’ mutations had a synergic effect in the mitigation of the symptomatology caused by SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in occupational medicine journals from 2014 to 2021. Methods: Papers edited between 2014 and 2021 in the 14 open access journals with the highest impact were assessed for their quality. Studies were included if they were systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and if they were published in English. Results: The study included 335 studies. Among these, 149 were meta-analyses and 186 were systematic reviews. The values of the AMSTAR-2 score range between three and fourteen with a mean value of 9.85 (SD = 2.37). The factors that significantly and directly associate to a higher AMSTAR-2 score were impact factor (p = 0.003), number of consulted research databases (p = 0.011), declaration of PRISMA statement (p = 0.003), year of publication (p < 0.001) and performing a meta-analysis (p < 0.001).The R² values from the multivariate analysis showed that the AMSTAR-2 score could be predicted by the inclusion of these parameters by up to 23%.Conclusions: This study suggests a quality assessment methodology that could help readers in a fast identification of good systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Future studies should analyze more journals without applying language restrictions and consider a wider range of years of publication in order to give a more robust evidence for results.

Purpose: The knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of young Italians towards the COVID-19 vaccination were analyzed in order to provide information useful to elaborate the strategies that can be implemented to obtain the best possible vaccination coverage in this population. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 5313 young people aged between 11 and 30 years. Data were collected through an online survey during the period from 1 to 10 March 2021. The answers to the questionnaire were analyzed using SPSS statistical software. Intention to vaccinate was studied by univariate analysis using Pearson’s chi-square test to assess differences between groups for categorical variables, and by multivariate analysis applying the binary logistic regression model, and the Hosmer–Lemeshow test was performed to assess goodness of fit. Results: Television (32.1%), internet/search engine (25.9%), and social networks (10.4%) were the main sources of information for young Italians. The survey analysis showed that 74.5% (3956) of the respondents were willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19 versus 25.5% (1357) who were against it. Demographic data, in particular, age, gender, experience with influenza vaccine, and level of knowledge about the disease, were significant determinants (p < 0.001) for the choice to vaccinate against COVID-19. Discussion: These results suggest that in order to implement the vaccination campaign, correct information is needed to improve awareness of the vaccine and COVID-19, while also taking into account the target group, which differs not only in age but also in the sources of information used compared to the adult population.