Pediatric post COVID-19 condition: an umbrella review of the most common symptoms and associated factors.

BACKGROUND: Although the long-term consequences of the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are yet to be fully comprehended, a syndrome symptomatically akin to the COVID-19 disease has been defined, for children and adolescents, in February 2023 by the World Health Organization (WHO) as 'post COVID-19 condition' (PCC). Potential consequences of COVID-19 that affect developmental milestones in children and adolescents should be comprehended in their magnitude and duration. The aim is to investigate the most common symptoms and predictors or risk factors for pediatric PCC. METHODS: In this umbrella review, the population of interest was defined as children and adolescents from 0 to 19 years old presenting PCC symptoms as defined by the WHO in the International Classification of Diseases. The intervention considered was general follow-up activity to monitor the patients' recovery status. No comparator was chosen, and the outcomes were symptoms of PCC and predictors or risk factors of developing PCC. Methodological quality, risk of bias and the level of overlap between studies were assessed. A random-effects meta-analytic synthesis of respective estimates with inverse variance study weighting was carried out, for the primary studies included by the reviews retrieved, regarding predictors or risk factors reported. RESULTS: We identified six eligible systematic reviews, five with meta-analyses, from three databases. The most common symptoms reported were fatigue and respiratory difficulties; female sex and older age were the most reported factors associated with the development of pediatric PCC. CONCLUSIONS: A deeper understanding of pediatric PCC requires well-designed and clearly defined prospective studies, symptom differentiation, and adequate follow-up.

The bigger, the better? A systematic review on the impact of mergers on primary care organizations.

BACKGROUND: Primary care services are the first point of contact in a healthcare system; in the last years, many mergers and reconfigurations have taken place in this setting. The aim of this study is to summarize the literature evidence on the relationship between the increase in the size of these organizations and their performance. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was carried out querying EMBASE, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases, from their inception to January 2020. Articles which quantitatively assessed outcomes and process indicators of merger/structural reorganization of primary care organizations and qualitative articles that assessed staff perception and satisfaction were included in the review. RESULTS: A total of 3626 articles was identified and another study was retrieved through snowball search; 11 studies were included in the systematic review. Studies about lipid profile evaluation and emergency admissions for chronic conditions showed moderate evidence in supporting the merging of primary care organizations; conversely, clinical outcome studies did not reach a sufficient level of evidence to support merging actions. A moderate evidence of a negative effect on patient's perspective was found. CONCLUSION: Actually, there is no strong evidence in favour or against merging of primary care organizations without equivocation. This review supports the possibility to identify indicators for evaluating a merging process of primary care organizations and for adopting eventual remedies during this process. Further efforts should be made to identify additional indicators to assess merge actions among primary care organizations.

Assessing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Pregnant Women's Attitudes towards Childhood Vaccinations: A Cross-Sectional Study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has globally disrupted immunisation practices, impacting vulnerable populations such as pregnant women (PW), who harbour concerns about future children's immunisations. This study aimed to assess the pandemic's impact on PW's attitudes towards childhood vaccinations. During three consecutive flu seasons from October 2019 to January 2022, a cross-sectional study was conducted in a large Italian teaching hospital using a questionnaire. The chi-square test was performed to compare each season. Across the 2019-2020 to 2021-2022 seasons, course attendance by PW surged from 105 to 340. Significant shifts in vaccination intentions were noted, including a 7.5% decrease in measles vaccination intent (p = 0.02) and a 10% decrease in that of pertussis (p = 0.004) from 2019-2020 to 2020-2021. While perceived contagion risk decreased, disease severity perceptions increased, with few significant differences. A statistically significant reduction was noted in the proportion of participants suspecting economic motives behind NHS workers' promotion of childhood vaccinations. Furthermore, the pandemic period saw an increase in the perceived utility of non-institutional websites and the advice of physicians outside the NHS. These findings will help develop evidence-based, tailored interventions and communication strategies to address vaccine hesitancy and ensure optimal vaccination coverage among children born during and after the pandemic.

Humoral response after a fourth dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in immunocompromised patients. Results of a systematic review.

Background and objective: The fourth dose the COVID-19 vaccine was first proposed to immunocompromised patients. The aim of the article is to systematically review the literature and report the humoral response and outcomes after the fourth dose administration in people with impaired immune system. Methods: Published studies on the humoral response, efficacy and safety of the fourth dose of the COVID-19 vaccine were analyzed in various settings of immunocompromised patients. We conducted systematic searches of PubMed, Cochrane Library and WHO COVID-19 Research Database for series published through January 31, 2023, using the search terms "fourth dose" or "second booster" or "4th dose" and "Coronavirus" or "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2." All articles were selected according to the PRISMA guidelines. Results: A total of 24 articles including 2,838 patients were comprised in the systematic review. All the studies involved immunocompromised patients, including solid organ transplant recipients, patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease, patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and patients with blood cancers or diseases. Almost all patients received BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 as fourth dose. All the studies demonstrated the increase of antibody titers after the fourth dose, both in patients who had a serological strong response and in those who had a weak response after the third dose. No serious adverse events after the 4th dose have been reported by 13 studies. COVID-19 infection after the fourth dose ranged from 0 to 21%. Conclusion: The present review highlights the importance of the fourth dose of covid-19 vaccines for immunocompromised patients. Across the included studies, a fourth dose was associated with improved seroconversion and antibody titer levels. In particular, a fourth dose was associated with increasing immunogenicity in organ transplant recipients and patients with hematological cancers, with a very low rate of serious side effects.

BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccine Safety among Healthcare Workers of a Tertiary Hospital in Italy.

Millions of people have died because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The vaccination campaign helped tackle the pandemic and saved millions of lives. In a retrospective pharmacovigilance study, we explored the safety of the BNT162b2 (Comirnaty) vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs) in a large Italian teaching hospital, and 2428 Adverse Events Reports (AERs) filed by HCWs after the administration of the first dose of vaccine were collected and analyzed, reporting the results quantitively and comparing them to the vaccine Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC). Spearman's correlation coefficients were computed to investigate the correlation among reported adverse effects, and recurrent clusters of symptoms were investigated through the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and k-means Cluster Analysis. The BNT162b2 vaccine's safety profile was favorable, with predominant reports of early onset, mild, non-serious and short-term resolved symptoms. We observed higher than the expected frequency for various non-serious undesirable effects, especially among those listed and classified as less common in the SPC. Furthermore, we identified three clusters of adverse effects that were frequently reported together, defined by the presence/absence of fatigue, malaise, localized pain, chills, pyrexia, insomnia, nausea and injection site pain. Post-marketing pharmacovigilance activities, together with targeted public health interventions, can be valuable tools to promote vaccination and improve the control of the spread of the pandemic, especially in sensitive settings and populations such as hospitals and healthcare professionals.

Three-year COVID-19 and flu vaccinations among medical residents in a tertiary hospital in Italy: The threat of acceptance decline in seasonal campaigns.

The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Italy started in December 2020, and, due to the Omicron variant's emergence, a second booster dose was recommended for high-risk individuals and healthcare workers from July 2022. The aim of the study was to evaluate the vaccination coverages for the COVID-19 second booster dose and to identify predictors of its acceptance within the population of medical residents (MRs) of the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS (FPG) University Hospital. The study was conducted at FPG from October 4th to December 21st, 2022, and COVID-19 second booster dose and influenza vaccines were administered. The study analyzed collected data and conducted multivariate logistic regressions to explore potential predictors of vaccination adherence. The analyses performed were compared with the sample enrolled in FPG residency programs at the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. 1968 MRs were involved in the 2022-2023 vaccination campaign (mean age 28.97, SD 3.44), and the second booster dose of COVID-19 vaccination coverage was low (18.80%). Almost all participants opted for co-administration of COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations, leading to a similar rate of influenza vaccination coverage (16.26%). Being a frontline resident, meaning a direct involvement in managing COVID-19 patients and vaccination campaigns, was the main predictor of vaccination adherence (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.25-2.17). The dropping in influenza vaccination coverage in 2022-2023 and the low adherence to COVID-19 second booster dose among young physicians is concerning, calling for tailored vaccination campaigns and interventions.

Co-administration of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza vaccines in healthcare workers: Results of two vaccination campaigns in a large teaching hospital in Rome.

The concurrent administration of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines has arisen as a promising approach to bolster protection against respiratory pathogens and improve vaccination rates. However, there remains a lack of data regarding the prevalence of co-administration across several vaccination campaigns, especially among healthcare workers (HCWs). Therefore, this study aims to shed light on the acceptance of co-administration strategies among HCWs during the two campaigns following the introduction of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. A retrospective cohort study was conducted among the HCWs of the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, a research hospital in Rome. Hospital administrative databases were accessed to gather information about vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza during the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 vaccination campaigns. The study included 7399 HCWs. The co-administration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 and influenza vaccines presented a significant rise in 2022/2023 compared to the previous vaccination campaign (+38%): this was confirmed for every professional category, with the largest increases among resident doctors (+47%) and physicians (+44%), and also for every age category, but it was particularly evident for the youngest health professionals. The probability of co-administration uptake during the 2022/2023 campaign was significantly higher for males, and for those that received co-administration during the 2021/2022 campaign, while the probability was lower for nurses and administrative staff. This study highlights the co-administration procedure as a valuable and effective tool in annual vaccination campaigns for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza. The procedure's safety and streamlined logistics make it increasingly attractive for implementation, particularly among HCWs.

Interprofessional Collaboration and Diabetes Management in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

The global spread of diabetes poses serious threats to public health requiring a patient-centered approach based both on interprofessional collaboration (IPC) given by the cooperation of several different health professionals, and patients' perspective through the assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs). The aim of the present study is to evaluate the impact of interprofessional collaboration interventions, for the management of type 2 diabetes in primary care settings, through PROs. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted querying the PubMed, Scopus and Embase databases. Out of the 1961 papers initially retrieved, 19 met the inclusion criteria. Interprofessional collaboration is significantly associated with an increase in both patient's satisfaction (SMD 0.32 95% CI 0.05-0.59) and in the mental well-being component of the HRQoL (SMD 0.18; 95% CI 0.06-0.30), and there was also promising evidence supporting the association between an interprofessional approach and an increase in self-care and in generic and specific quality-of-life. No statistical differences were found, supporting the positive impact on IPC interventions on the physical component of the HRQoL, depression, emotional distress, and self-efficacy. In conclusion, the effect of IPC impacts positively on the few areas assessed by PROMs. Policymakers should promote the widespread adoption of a collaborative approach as well as to endorse an active engagement of patients across the whole process of care.

Planning and Organization of the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign: An Overview of Eight European Countries.

The initial progress of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign worldwide depended on several aspects, including programmatic/practical issues. This paper focused on the planning and organization of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in eight European countries (Sweden, Denmark, Romania, Hungary, Italy, Spain, Germany, and France), from the launch to August 2021. Information on the planning of the vaccination campaign (release and update of a national immunization plan, types of vaccines being used and their limitations/suspensions) and its organization (vaccination target groups, possibility of citizens' choice, vaccination workforce and settings, vaccines procurement) were obtained through desk research of international and national reports, plans, and websites. Eventually, data on vaccination coverage were drawn from Our world in data and analyzed through join point regression. The eight countries showed differences in groups prioritization, limitations/suspensions of use of specific vaccines, citizens' possibility to choose vaccines, and vaccination workforce involved. These issues could have contributed to the different progress towards high levels of vaccination coverage. In respect to vaccination coverage, Romania reached much lower levels than other countries. Further comparative research is needed in order to identify best practices in vaccination campaign that could be useful for the next phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, and be better prepared for future potential pandemic.

Queueing Theory and COVID-19 Prevention: Model Proposal to Maximize Safety and Performance of Vaccination Sites.

Introduction: COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 19) has rapidly spread all around the world. Vaccination represents one of the most promising counter-pandemic measures. There is still little specific evidence in literature on how to safely and effectively program access and flow through specific healthcare settings to avoid overcrowding in order to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Literature regarding appointment scheduling in healthcare is vast. Unpunctuality however, especially when targeting healthcare workers during working hours, is always possible. Therefore, when determining how many subjects to book, using a linear method assuming perfect adhesion to scheduled time could lead to organizational problems. Methods: This study proposes a "Queuing theory" based approach. A COVID-19 vaccination site targeting healthcare workers based in a teaching hospital in Rome was studied to determine real-life arrival rate variability. Three simulations using Queueing theory were performed. Results: Queueing theory application reduced subjects queueing over maximum safety requirements by 112 in a real-life based vaccination setting, by 483 in a double-sized setting and by 750 in a mass vaccination model compared with a linear approach. In the 3 settings, respectively, the percentage of station's time utilization was 98.6, 99.4 and 99.8%, while the average waiting time was 27.2, 33.84, and 33.84 min. Conclusions: Queueing theory has already been applied in healthcare. This study, in line with recent literature developments, proposes the adoption of a Queueing theory base approach to vaccination sites modeling, during the COVID-19 pandemic, as this tool enables to quantify ahead of time the outcome of organizational choices on both safety and performance of vaccination sites.

Flu and COVID-19 Vaccination: What Happens to the Flu Shot When the Campaigns Overlap? Experience from a Large Italian Research Hospital.

Influenza represents a threat to global health and health care workers (HCWs) have an increased risk of contracting the influenza virus in the workplace. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought back the importance of influenza vaccination, as the influenza virus can circulate together with SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this report is to describe the actual flu vaccination coverage among healthcare workers of a research hospital and the trend changes, with respect to the past flu vaccination campaigns, in light of the present pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination. A Pearson's χ2 test was used to test the correlation of flu vaccination coverage, across all professional categories, between the last two years. A linear regression model was adopted to predict the total vaccination coverage of this year. A statistically significant decrease (p < 0.01) was observed in vaccination coverage among all the professional categories with a 50% reduction in vaccination trends between the last two years. Analyzing the data from the previous six flu vaccination campaigns, the expected value, according to the linear regression model, was estimated to be 38.5% while the observed value was 24%. The decrease in vaccination coverage may be due to the fear of the pandemic situation and especially to the uncertainty related to the consequences of a concurrent administration which may overload the immune system or may be more reactogenic. The COVID-19 pandemic represents an opportunity to promote and support large-scale influenza vaccination among HCWs through structured programs, adequate funding, and tailored communication strategies.

COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign among the Health Workers of Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS: A Cost-Benefit Analysis.

Vaccinations generate health, economic and social benefits in both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-benefit analysis to estimate the costs and benefits associated with the COVID-19 vaccination campaign for health workers in Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS (FPG). The analysis included 5152 healthcare workers who voluntarily received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, divided into physicians, nurses and other health workers. Data about vaccine cost, administration and materials were derived from administrative databases of the FPG from 28 December 2020 to 31 March 2021. The costs associated with the COVID-19 vaccination campaign amounted to EUR 2,221,768, while the benefits equaled EUR 10,345,847. The benefit-to-cost ratio resulted in EUR 4.66, while the societal return on investment showed a ratio of EUR 3.66. The COVID-19 vaccination campaign for health workers in FPG has high social returns and it strengthens the need to inform and update decision-making about the economic and social benefits associated with a vaccination campaign. Health economic evaluations on vaccines should always be considered by decision-makers when considering the inclusion of a new vaccine into the national program.

Medical Residents' Behaviours toward Compulsory COVID-19 Vaccination in a Tertiary Hospital in Italy.

To maintain safety conditions in the provision of care and assistance, and to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) and patients, the Italian government required compulsory COVID-19 vaccination for HCWs, including medical residents (MRs). The aim of this study was to assess COVID-19 vaccination coverage in MRs in a large tertiary hospital in Italy, before and after the introduction of compulsory vaccination, according to demographic characteristics and specific residency. A database on COVID-19 vaccination status and infection of resident medical doctors was created. Descriptive statistics and logistic regressions were carried out on the data. A total of 1894 MRs were included in the study. Being vaccinated in the same hospital as the residency program was significantly related to the year of residency and being enrolled in a frontline residency. A significant association between compliance with the compulsory primary cycle vaccination and vaccination in the hospital residency was observed. Being enrolled in the second, third, and last years of residency, and in a frontline residency, were predictive of being vaccinated in the residency hospital. Almost 100% of the MRs participating in the study were vaccinated against COVID-19. Compulsory vaccination of HCWs, alongside greater and clearer information about the risks and benefits of vaccination, represents an important booster to ensure public health and to promote quality and safety of care.

Knowledge and beliefs about vaccination in pregnant women before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: Vaccine hesitancy threatens the health of populations and challenges Public Health professionals. Strategies to reduce it aim to improve people's risk perception about vaccine-preventable diseases, fill knowledge gaps about vaccines and increase trust in healthcare providers. During pregnancy, educational interventions can provide a proper knowledge about safety and efficacy of maternal and childhood vaccinations. Fighting hesitancy and clarifying doubts is fundamental during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have affected people's knowledge and beliefs toward vaccination. This study aimed at assessing if the advent of the pandemic was associated with changes in pregnant women's knowledge and beliefs toward vaccination, and trust in healthcare services. Methods: A repeated cross-sectional study was conducted through self-reported questionnaires in a Roman teaching hospital, where educational classes about vaccinations are routinely held as part of a birthing preparation course. Data were collected on a sample of pregnant women before and during the pandemic. Free-of-charge flu vaccinations were offered to all course participants and adherence to flu vaccination was assessed. Results: The proportion of pregnant women reporting that vaccines have mild side effects and that are sufficiently tested increased from 78.6 to 92.0% (p = 0.001) and from 79.4 to 93.2% (p = 0.001), respectively. There was a reduction from 33.0 to 23.3% (p = 0.065) in the proportion of those declaring that healthcare workers (HCWs) give information only on the benefits and not on the risks of vaccines, and a reduction from 27.3 to 12.1% (p = 0.001) in those reporting that vaccines are an imposition and not a free choice of mothers. Trust in National Health Service (NHS) operators slightly decreased. Among participants, the monthly flu vaccination adherence ranged from 50.0% in November to 29.2% January for 2019-20 flu season, and from 56.3% in September to 14.5% in January for 2020-21 flu season, showing a higher vaccination acceptance in the earlier months of 2020-21 flu season. Conclusions: The pandemic may have positively affected pregnant women's knowledge and opinions about vaccinations and trust in HCWs, despite a possible negative impact on their perceptions about NHS operators. This should inspire Public Health professionals to rethink their role as health communicators.

Risk of Infection and Duration of Protection after the Booster Dose of the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine BNT162b2 among Healthcare Workers in a Large Teaching Hospital in Italy: Results of an Observational Study.

The efficacy of the first schedule of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines has decreased after the surge of the Delta variant, posing the need to administer a booster dose to enhance the neutralising immune response. This study aims at evaluating the duration of protection given by the booster dose of Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in healthcare workers (HCWs) of a large teaching hospital in Rome and to analyse the factors associated with post-booster vaccination infections. Data about vaccinations of HCWs with the BNT162b2 vaccine and nasal swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 were extracted from the digital archives of the hospital from 27 September 2021 to 31 May 2022. In total, 5770 HCWs were observed. The cumulative risk of becoming infected by SARS-CoV-2 increased with time (2.5% at 4 weeks, 17% at 12 weeks and 40% at 24 weeks) and was significantly higher for females, younger classes of patients and for those who had developed a hybrid immunity (natural infection plus one dose, namely the primary schedule, added to the booster dose) compared to those who had completed the three doses. This study describes the duration and the determinants of the protection against infections after the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of vaccine-induced immunogenicity.

Effect of Lockdowns on Hospital Staff in a COVID Center: A Retrospective Observational Study.

At the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, individual and social measures were strengthened through restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions, labelled with the term "lockdown". In Italy, there were two lockdowns (9 March 2020−3 May 2020 and 3 November 2020−27 March 2021). As part of preventive measures, healthcare workers and the administrative staff population of Policlinico A. Gemelli underwent nasopharyngeal swab tests from 1 March 2020 to 9 February 2022, a long time interval that includes the two aforementioned lockdowns. The population included 8958 people from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2020; 8981 people from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021; and 8981 people from 1 January 2022 to 9 February 2022. We then analysed pseudo-anonymized data, using a retrospective observational approach to evaluate the impact of the lockdown on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections within the population. Given the 14 day contagious period, the swab positivity rate (SPR) among the staff decreased significantly at the end of the first lockdown, every day prior to 18 May 2020, by 0.093 (p < 0.0001, CI = (−0.138−−0.047)). After the fourteenth day post the end of the first lockdown (18 May 2020), the SPR increased daily at a rate of 0.024 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI = (0.013−0.034)). In addition, the SPR appeared to increase significantly every day prior to 17 November 2020 by 0.024 (p < 0.0001, CI = (0.013−0.034)). After the fourteenth day post the start of the second lockdown (17 November 2020), the SPR decreased daily at a rate of 0.039 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI = (−0.050−−0.027)). These data demonstrate that, in our Institution, the lockdowns helped to both protect healthcare workers and maintain adequate standards of care for COVID and non-COVID patients for the duration of the state of emergency in Italy.

Impact of interprofessional collaboration on chronic disease management: Findings from a systematic review of clinical trial and meta-analysis.

Improvement of chronic disease management demands effective collaborative relationships between health and social-care which is achieved through teamwork. Interprofessional Education (IPE) and Interprofessional Collaboration (IPC) are recognized as essential for the delivery of effective and efficient healthcare. Although IPC and IPE are key components of primary care, evidence of studies evaluating how an IPE intervention prior to IPC improved chronic patient outcomes remains scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of IPC interventions on the management of chronic patients compared to usual care. A systematic review and meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) on IPC interventions on chronicity management and their impact on clinical and process outcomes was conducted. Of the 11,128 papers initially retrieved, 23 met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses results showed the reduction of systolic blood pressure (Mean Difference (MD) -3.70; 95 % CI -7.39, -0.01), glycosylated hemoglobin (MD -0.20; 95 % CI -0.47, -0.07), LDL cholesterol (MD -5.74; 95 % CI -9.34, -2.14), diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.95; 95 % CI -3.18, -0.72), days of hospitalization (MD -2.22; 95 % CI -4.30, -0.140). A number of positive findings for outcomes related to IPC were found reflecting an improvement of quality of care and an enhancement in the delivery of patient-centered and coordinated care. Moreover, the need for a purposeful systemic approach linking interprofessional education with interprofessional collaboration and patient health and wellbeing is necessary.

Is COVID-19 a Real Incentive for Flu Vaccination? Let the Numbers Speak for Themselves.

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.

Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Safety of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccine in the Vaccination Campaign among the Health Workers of Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS.

Health workers, especially those in patient-facing roles, had a significantly increased risk of COVID-19 infection, having serious outcomes, and risking spreading the virus to patients and staff. Vaccination campaign planning suggests allocating initial supplies of BNT162b2 vaccine to health workers given the importance of early protection to safeguard the continuity of care to patients. The aim of the study is to assess the effectiveness and safety of BNT162b2 vaccine among the health workers of Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS (FPG). The retrospective cohort study was conducted among health staff working at the FPG. Vaccination data were collected from hospital records. The primary end points were vaccine effectiveness and safety. A total of 6649 health workers were included, of whom 5162 received injections. There were 14 cases of COVID-19 with onset at least 14 days after the second dose among vaccinated health workers and 45 cases among unvaccinated ones. BNT162b2 was 91.5% effective against COVID-19 (95% credible interval, 84.7% to 95.3%). The safety profile of BNT162b2 vaccine consisted of short-term, non-serious events. The promotion and boost of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign represents a key public health measure useful to curb the spread of the pandemic especially in vulnerable contexts, such as hospitals, where health workers carry out a paramount role for the entire community, and requires further protection with a possible booster dose in view of autumn-winter 2021.

COVID-19 Seroprevalence among Healthcare Workers of a Large COVID-19 Hospital in Rome Reveals Strengths and Limits of Two Different Serological Tests.

Healthcare workers are at the forefront against COVID-19, worldwide. Since Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli (FPG) IRCCS was enlisted as a COVID-19 hospital, the healthcare workers deployed to COVID-19 wards were separated from those with limited/no exposure, whereas the administrative staff were designated to work from home. Between 4 June and 3 July 2020, an investigation was conducted to evaluate the seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin (IgG) antibodies among the 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 on nasal/oropharyngeal swabs as the diagnostic gold standard. The participants enrolled amounted to 4777. Seroprevalence was 3.66% using the POC test and 1.19% using the venous blood test, with a significant difference (p < 0.05). The POC test 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 the low-risk populations, the POC test's predictive values were 58.33% (positive) and 98.23% (negative), whereas those of the venous blood test were 92.86% (positive) and 98.53% (negative). According to our study, these serological tests cannot be a valid alternative to diagnose COVID-19 infection in progress.