Development of a User-friendly Health Promotion Website to Spread Evidence-based Information in Italy.

Introduction: Appropriate communication models and strategies are crucial in order to strengthen preventive and health promotion interventions via digital platforms. Today, 52.23% of the Italian population use the Internet as a source of health-related information. The aim of the "Insegna Salute" project was to create a website that would enable people to satisfy their knowledge health needs and increase their awareness in the field of prevention. Methods: To develop the website, a qualitative literature research was carried out to collect an overview of effective online health communication strategies and tools before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, we implemented the website insegnasalute.it according to the one-to-many (screen-to-face) communication model. The second part of the research focused on identifying tools to ensure the constant update of the platform. Finally, we proceeded with the creation of the visual identity. Results: The research resulted in 28 sources regarding health communication, vaccine hesitancy, online health information seeking, visual identity, current digital and social trends and mis/disinformation. Many publications reported that healthcare professionals (HCPs) are the main providers of evidence-based information and the most effective agents against misinformation. Furthermore, most of the articles advocated the use of digital technologies, such as social media and websites, along with proactive and targeted communication strategies. Conclusions: Vaccination hesitancy and other health prevention issues require accurate tools to build trust-based relationships between users and healthcare professionals. In line with the preventive guidelines issued by the Italian Ministry of Health, new tools, such as "Insegna Salute", integrate health knowledge with communication strategies. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, preventive measures are essential to protect the population from misinformation spread and the probability of getting ill.

Influenza epidemiology and vaccine effectiveness during the 2023/2024 season in Italy: A test-negative case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: In order to support policymakers in allocating resources, we aimed to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) of inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs) available for Italian adults in the 2023/2024 season. METHODS: A hospital-based test-negative case-control study was conducted in Genoa between mid-October 2023 and mid-April 2024. Adult (≥18 years) inpatients with prescription of a polymerase chain reaction test for influenza were eligible. RESULTS: Of 1,664 adults analyzed, most (82%) of which were ≥65 years, 114 (6.9%) tested positive for influenza A. Most (92%) cases were caused by subclades 6B.1A.5a.2a and 6B.1A.5a.2a.1 of the A(H1N1)pdm09 subtype. In older adults aged ≥65 years vaccination was effective at 51% (95% CI: 8%, 74%) against any influenza A and 49% (95% CI: 2%, 73%) against A(H1N1)pdm09. Compared with non-vaccinated older adults, VE point estimates for the adjuvanted and, especially, high-dose IIVs were higher than those for the standard-dose non-adjuvanted IIV. CONCLUSION: The 2023/2024 seasonal influenza vaccination proved moderately effective in preventing hospitalization for laboratory-confirmed influenza. Being more appropriate for older adults, local policymakers and vaccinating physicians should maximize adoption of the enhanced IIVs.

Exploring missed opportunities for influenza vaccination and influenza vaccine co-administration patterns among Italian older adults: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Missed opportunities constitute a main driver of suboptimal seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) coverage in older adults. Vaccine co-administration is a way to reduce these missed opportunities. In this study, we quantified missed opportunities for SIV, identified some of their socio-structural correlates and documented SIV co-administration patterns. METHODS: In this registry-based retrospective cohort study, we verified the SIV status of all subjects aged ≥65 years who received at least one dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pneumococcal or herpes zoster vaccines during the 2022/23 influenza season. The frequency of concomitant same-day administration of SIV with other target vaccines was also assessed. RESULTS: Among 41 112, 5482 and 3432 older adults who received ≥1 dose of COVID-19, pneumococcal and herpes zoster vaccines, missed opportunities for SIV accounted for 23.3%, 5.0% and 13.2%, respectively. Younger, male and foreign-born individuals were generally more prone to missing SIV. The co-administration of SIV with other recommended vaccines was relatively low, being 11.0%, 53.1% and 17.1% in COVID-19, pneumococcal and herpes zoster cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A sizeable proportion of older adults who received other recommended vaccines during the last influenza season did not receive SIV. This share of missed opportunities, which are subject to some social inequalities, may be addressed by increasing vaccine co-administration rates and implementing tailored health promotion interventions.

Influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing hospital encounters for laboratory-confirmed infection among Italian adults, 2022/23 season.

The effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) varies from year to year. Interim estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in outpatient settings have suggested that the 2022/23 northern hemisphere SIV was 54 % effective. The main goal of this study was to measure the 2022/23 SIV VE among Italian adults in a hospital setting. The study adopted a retrospective test-negative case-control design and was conducted in a large tertiary hospital (Genoa, Italy) between October 2022 and April 2023. Adult (≥18 years) patients accessing the hospital's Emergency Department for symptoms ascribable to an acute respiratory infection, for which a reverse-transcription real-time polymerase chain reaction test for the detection of influenza virus was prescribed, were potentially eligible. Of 33,692 referrals assessed, 487 patients were included in the study. A total of 13 % of patients were positive for influenza, most of which (63 %) belonged to the A(H3N2) subtype. SIV VE was 57 % (95 % CI: 11-81 %), 53 % (95 % CI: 2-80 %) and 38 % (95 % CI: -34-74 %) against any influenza, influenza A and A(H3N2), respectively. Although no cases caused by A(H1N1)pdm09 and B strains were observed among vaccinated individuals, VE estimates against the latter were imprecise, owing to their low detection rates. In conclusion, the 2022/23 SIV was moderately effective against hospital encounters for laboratory-confirmed influenza.

External validation of unsupervised COVID-19 clinical phenotypes and their prognostic impact.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be classified into different clinical phenotypes based on their demographic, clinical, radiology, and laboratory features. We aimed to validate in an external cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients the prognostic value of a previously described phenotyping system (FEN-COVID-19) and to assess the reproducibility of phenotypes development as a secondary analysis. METHODS: Patients were classified in phenotypes A, B or C according to the severity of oxygenation impairment, inflammatory response, hemodynamic and laboratory tests according to the FEN-COVID-19 method. RESULTS: Overall, 992 patients were included in the study, and 181 (18%), 757 (76%) and 54 (6%) of them were assigned to the FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes A, B, and C, respectively. An association with mortality was observed for phenotype C vs. A (hazard ratio [HR] 3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81-5.30, p < 0.001) and for phenotype C vs. B (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.50-3.23, p < 0.001). A non-statistically significant trend towards higher mortality was also observed for phenotype B vs. A (HR 1.41; 95% CI 0.92-2.15, p = 0.115). By means of cluster analysis, three different phenotypes were also identified in our cohort, with an overall similar gradient in terms of prognostic impact to that observed when patients were assigned to FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic impact of FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes was confirmed in our external cohort, although with less difference in mortality between phenotypes A and B than in the original study.

Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 can be classified into different clinical phenotypes based on their demographic, clinical, radiology, and laboratory featuresIn this study, we externally confirmed the prognostic impact of clinical phenotypes previously identified by Gutierrez-Gutierrez and colleagues in a Spanish cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and the usefulness of their simplified probabilistic model for phenotypes assignmentThis could indirectly support the validity of both phenotype's development and their extrapolation to other hospitals and countries for management decisions during other possible future viral pandemics.

Rapid differential diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial viruses: Validation of a novel RT-PCR assay.

BACKGROUND: Influenza and respiratory syncytial (RSV) viruses are expected to co-circulate with SARS-CoV-2 in the upcoming seasons and clinical differential diagnosis between them is difficult. Laboratory-based RT-PCR is a gold standard diagnostic method for influenza, RSV and SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to estimate the diagnostic performance of a novel point-of-care RT-PCR assay STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 (SD Biosensor) in a large number of clinical specimens with diversified (co)-infection patterns and viral loads. METHODS: This was a retrospective study, in which all samples were tested in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 index and Allplex SARS-CoV-2/Respiratory Panel 1 (Seegene) reference kits. Samples with discordant results were further processed in a third resolver test (Resp-4-Plex, Abbott). RESULTS: A total of 1,019 naso-/oropharyngeal samples (50.3% positive for at least one virus) were processed in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 and Allplex assays and the overall between-assay agreement was as high as 94.6%. Positive percent agreement of the STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 was 100%, 96.6%, 97.3% and 99.4% for influenza A, B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2, respectively. The corresponding negative percent agreement was 99.7%. 100%, 100% and 98.4%, respectively. The expected positive and negative predictive values for all viruses were constantly above 96% in a reasonable range of disease prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 is a reliable RT-PCR assay able to detect influenza A, influenza B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2 in one hour or less, fostering a rapid differential diagnosis of common respiratory viruses.

Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of the STANDARD M10 Assay for the Molecular Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in the Point-of-Care and Critical Care Settings.

Accurate and rapid molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 is a crucial step to tackle the ongoing pandemic. The primary objective of this study was to estimate the real-world performance of the novel RT-PCR STANDARD M10 SARS-CoV-2 assay in a large number of nasopharyngeal (NP) specimens eluted in universal transport medium. The secondary objective was to evaluate the compatibility of this kit in testing NP samples eluted in an inactivated transport medium (essential for point-of-care testing) and lower respiratory tract (LRT) specimens, which are commonly collected in critical care. A total of 591 samples were analyzed. Compared with the standard extraction-based RT-PCR Allplex 2019-nCoV (time-to-result of 270 min), the sensitivities of the STANDARD M10 were 100% (95% CI: 98.1-100%), 95.5% (95% CI: 91.7-97.6%), and 99.5% (95% CI: 97.2-99.9%) for ≥1 gene, the ORF1ab gene, and the E gene, respectively, while the specificity was 100% (95% CI: 98.7-100%). The diagnostic accuracy was 100% in testing both NP samples eluted in an inactivated transport medium and LRT specimens. STANDARD M10 reliably detects SARS-CoV-2 in 60 min, may be used as a POC tool, and is suitable for testing LRT specimens in the critical care setting.

COVID-19 and Seasonal Influenza Vaccination: Cross-Protection, Co-Administration, Combination Vaccines, and Hesitancy.

SARS-CoV-2 and influenza are the main respiratory viruses for which effective vaccines are currently available. Strategies in which COVID-19 and influenza vaccines are administered simultaneously or combined into a single preparation are advantageous and may increase vaccination uptake. Here, we comprehensively review the available evidence on COVID-19/influenza vaccine co-administration and combination vaccine candidates from the standpoints of safety, immunogenicity, efficacy, policy and public acceptance. While several observational studies have shown that the trained immunity induced by influenza vaccines can protect against some COVID-19-related endpoints, it is not yet understood whether co-administration or combination vaccines can exert additive effects on relevant outcomes. In randomized controlled trials, co-administration has proved safe, with a reactogenicity profile similar to that of either vaccine administered alone. From the immunogenicity standpoint, the immune response towards four influenza strains and the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in co-administration groups is generally non-inferior to that seen in groups receiving either vaccine alone. Several public health authorities have advocated co-administration. Different combination vaccine candidates are in (pre)-clinical development. The hesitancy towards vaccine co-administration or combination vaccines is a multifaceted phenomenon and may be higher than the acceptance of either vaccine administered separately. Public health implications are discussed.

Low back pain and FokI (rs2228570) polymorphism of vitamin D receptor in athletes.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is common in athletes. LBP can be detrimental to athletic performance and health. Factors predisposing to LBP in athletes remain elusive and require further studies. We investigated whether carriage of a specific genotype and/or allele of vitamin D receptor gene (VDR) FokI polymorphism (rs2228570) was a risk factor for LBP in athletes of different sports disciplines. METHODS: This genotype/phenotype association case-control study included 60 Italian athletes (25 females and 35 males; mean age 33.9 ± 13.3 years; body-mass-index 23.5 ± 3.5 kg/m2) of which 16.7% were swimmers, 11.7% soccer players, 11.7% volleyball players, 10.0% rugby players and other disciplines. VDR-FokI polymorphism was measured by PCR-RFLP in 24 athletes with LBP and 36 athletes without LBP episodes. Absence or presence of the FokI restriction site was denoted "F" and "f", respectively. Other risk factors were evaluated by a questionnaire. RESULTS: The homozygous FF genotype was found in 58.3% (14/24) of athletes with LBP versus 27.8% (10/36) of athletes without LBP, adjusted OR = 5.78, 95% CI 1.41-23.8, P = 0.015. The F allele was a 2-fold risk factor to develop LBP, adjusted OR = 2.55, 95% CI 1.02-6.43, P = 0.046, while f allele was protective. Exposure to vehicle vibrations ≥2 h daily, and family history of lumbar spine pathology were significant risk factors for LBP with OR = 3.54, and OR = 9.21, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study in which an association between VDR-FokI polymorphism and LBP in athletes was found. Further research is needed to extend our results, and to clarify the biochemical pathways associated with how vitamin D modulates LBP in athletes. The VDR-FokI polymorphism should be considered when developing genetic focused studies of precision medicine on health in athletes.