Factors Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Infection before Vaccination among European Health Care Workers.

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) were on the frontline of the current pandemic. We aimed at identifying determinants of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the effectiveness of personal protection equipment (PPE) worn by HCWs before vaccination. METHODS: We abstracted data on SARS-CoV-2 infection based on positive PCR results and sociodemographic characteristics of 38,793 HCWs from public hospitals and public health authorities from 10 European centers. We fitted cohort-specific multivariate logistic regression models to identify determinants of infection and combined the results using random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of infection before vaccination among HCWs was 9.58%. Infection was associated with the presence of selected symptoms; no association was found between sociodemographic factors and increased risk of infection. The use of PPE and particularly FFP2/FFP3 masks had a different protective effect during the first and second waves of the COVID pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides evidence that mask use was the most effective PPE in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs.

Effectiveness of prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission among unvaccinated Italian healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the association between personal protective equipment (PPE) use and SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: We analyzed occupational surveillance contact forms followed by a PCR test notified between March and September 2020 by Italian HCWs. The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) for positive PCR based on HCWs and contacts characteristics were calculated through multivariable logistic regression models. When multiple contacts were potentially effective for a PCR test, they were weighted by the inverse of their number. RESULTS: Overall, 4,883 contacts reported by 2,952 HCWs were analyzed, and 224 contacts among 144 HCWs had positive PCR. No difference was found according to sex, age, employment, or job title, except for an OR of 0.30 (95%CI 0.11-0.78) for resident physicians, compared to administrative staff. The ORs for use of surgical mask were 0.59 (95%CI=0.40-0.86) for use only by HCW, 0.49 (95%CI=0.22-1.07) only by the infected person, and 0.40 (95%CI=0.27-0.60) by both, compared to use by neither. Use of other PPEs was not associated with infection, while the OR for hand sanitation was 0.61 (95%CI=0.40-0.93). HCWs reporting fever, cough, and asthenia had a higher risk of infection. CONCLUSIONS: Use of surgical masks was associated with a 40-60% lower risk of infection, especially when both HCWs and infected individuals used them. Our results quantify the role played by mask use and hand sanitation in preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission in high-risk circumstances.

Serological response after SARS-CoV2 vaccination in healthcare workers: a multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: Characterizing immunological response following COVID-19 vaccination is an important public health issue. The objectives of the present analysis were to investigate the proportion, level and the determinants of humoral response from 21 days to three months after the first dose in vaccinated healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: We abstracted data on level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike antibodies (IgG) and sociodemographic characteristics of 17,257 HCWs from public hospitals and public health authorities from three centers in Northern Italy who underwent COVID-19 vaccination (average 70.6 days after first dose). We fitted center-specific multivariate regression models and combined them using random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: A humoral response was elicited in 99.3% of vaccinated HCW. Female sex, young age, and previous COVID-19 infection were predictors of post-vaccination antibody level, and a positive association was also detected with pre-vaccination serology level and with time between pre- and post-vaccination testing, while a decline of antibody level was suggested with time since vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: These results stress the importance of analyzing retrospective data collected via occupational health surveillance of HCWs during the COVID-19 epidemic and following vaccination. They need to be confirmed in larger series based on prospectively collected data.

Methodological issues in descriptive environmental epidemiology. The example of study Sentieri.

BACKGROUND: Descriptive epidemiology identifies associations between environmental exposures and health effects that require results from methodologically stronger studies before causation can be considered. OBJECTIVE: To critically review the methodology and results of Sentieri, a descripitive study on residence in areas with one or more industrial source of pollution. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature quoted by Sentieri for the selection of health effects of nine types of pollution sources of a-priori interest. We also reviewed and meta-analyzed the results of the first report of Sentieri, that analyzed mortality in 44 polluted sites (PS), and 17 causes of deaths during 1995-2002. RESULTS: Among 159 study results quoted by Sentieri, 23.9 % were supportive of an association between residence near a pollution source and a health effect, 30.2 % were partially supportive, 10.7 % were not supportive, and 35.2 % were not relevant. Among 653 standardized mortality ratios for associations between PS-specific pollution sources and causes of death, 14.4% were significantly above 1.02, and 9.0% were significantly below 0.98. Among 48 meta-analysis, seven were significantly above 1.0, including five on exposure to asbestos. CONCLUSIONS: Sentieri exemplifies the limitations of descriptive environmental epidemiology studies, in which most hypotheses have limited prior support, most results do not show associations, data on potential confounders and other sources of bias are not available. Such studies tend to replicate well-known associations and occasionally can identify critical situations requiring more investigation, but cannot be used to infer causality either in general or in specific circumstances.

Lead poisoning from Ayurvedic treatment: a further case.

PURPOSE: We report a case of a 30 years old Indian sailor with microcytic anemia (Hb 9.9), persistent abdominal pain, emesis, dark stool, hyperchromic urine, latent jaundice and asthenia. Lead intoxication was confirmed (blood lead value of 102 µg/dL). The patient assumed Ayurvedic medicines in the previous months. Ayurveda is an ancient form of Indian traditional popular medicine aiming to re-establish health and body function through herbal preparations, heavy metals are often added. Our purpose was to treat the patient and to establish the source of poisoning. METHODS: After testing blood and urine lead concentration of other 3 crew members and analyzing over than 150 products used on the ship professional exposure was excluded. We analyzed the two Ayurvedic drugs assumed by the patient with an Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry. The patient underwent three chelation cycles with Calcium Disodium Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) while monitoring blood and urinary lead levels. RESULTS: The final blood lead level at discharge, after three chelation cycles, was 36.27 µg/dL. One of the two drugs contained extremely high concentrations of lead and mercury. The three different mixtures of this preparation showed lead concentrations of 12,638.54 mg/kg (Sample 2A), 23,043.02 mg/kg (Sample 2B), 21,352.97 mg/kg (Sample 2C); these levels are much higher than the highest values reported in literature for the indian soil (32 mg/kg). CONCLUSIONS: This case and similar cases raise the safety alert on complementary and alternative medicines; Ayurvedic medicine users should be carefully informed about potential risks and signs of poisoning.

Assessment of air and surfaces contamination in a COVID-19 non-Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome - Coronavirus - 2 (SARS-CoV-2)  is a virus, primarily transmitted through  droplets, able to persist on different surfaces and in the air for several hours. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Health Care Workers should be considered a high risk profession. Beside social distancing rules and the proper use of Personal Protective Equipment,  sanitization measures and ventilation system disinfection are essential to reduce viral transmission. OBJECTIVES: This is the first Italian study aiming to assess the magnitude of environmental contamination in a COVID-19 non-Intensive Care Unit. METHODS: In addition to ordinary cleaning procedures, surface and air samplings have been performed before and after the application of two different sanitization devices. Samples have been analyzed with Real Time-Polymerase Chain Reaction in order to find viral RNA. RESULTS: All samples obtained from surfaces and air before and after extra-ordinary sanitization procedures turned out negative for viral detection. DISCUSSION: These findings highlight the efficiency of ordinary cleaning procedures in guaranteeing a safer workplace. The adoption of additional sanitization protocols should be considered in order to further reduce environmental viral contamination.

COVID-19 infection and diffusion among the healthcare workforce in a large university-hospital in northwest Italy.

Backgroud: Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, healthcare workers (HCWs) have been the workers most likely to contract the disease. Intensive focus is therefore needed on hospital strategies that minimize exposure and diffusion, confer protection and facilitate early detection and isolation of infected personnel. METHODS: To evaluate the early impact of a structured risk-management for exposed COVID-19 HCWs and describe how their characteristics contributed to infection and diffusion. Socio-demographic and clinical data, aspects of the event-exposure (date, place, length and distance of exposure, use of PPE) and details of the contact person were collected. RESULTS: The 2411 HCWs reported 2924 COVID-19 contacts. Among 830 HCWs who were at 'high or medium risk', 80 tested positive (9.6%). Physicians (OR=2.03), and non-medical services -resulted in an increased risk (OR=4.23). Patient care did not increase the risk but sharing the work environment did (OR=2.63). There was a significant time reduction between exposure and warning, exposure and test, and warning and test since protocol implementation. HCWs with management postitions were the main source of infection due to the high number of interactions. DISCUSSION: A proactive system that includes prompt detection of contagious staff and identification of sources of exposure helps to lower the intra-hospital spread of infection. A speedier return to work of staff who would otherwise have had to self-isolate as a precautionary measure improves staff morale and patient care by reducing the stress imposed by excessive workloads arising from staff shortages.

Serosusceptibility and hesitancy for booster HBV vaccination among health care workers in Italy: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of exposure to hepatitis B virus (HBV). The most effective prevention measure is vaccination, with a serum hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) titre > 10 mIU/ml considered protective. To date, the sociodemographic and occupational characteristics related to HBV serosusceptibility and factors associated with booster hesitancy remain unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to identify factors associated with maintaining a protective HBsAb titre in a large sample of HCWs and to evaluate factors potentially associated with hesitancy towards vaccine boosters. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs who underwent a health surveillance visit between 2017 and 2022. If the serum HBsAb titre was < 10 MIU/ml, a vaccine booster dose was offered. Based on their willingness to be vaccinated, employees were classified into three groups: acceptance, hesitation, and refusal. Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed to assess the association of demographic and occupational characteristics with serosusceptibility and attitudes towards vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 1632 (27%) employees were shown to be nonimmune. A lower median age and being a physician were significantly associated with a protective HBsAb titre. A total of 706 nonimmune employees (43.3%) accepted the vaccination, 865 (53%) hesitated, and 61 (3.7%) refused. The median age of those who refused vaccination was significantly higher than that of those who hesitated and those who were vaccinated. Acceptance of vaccination was significantly higher among nurses, while nurse aides hesitated more; among nonmedical graduate staff both hesitation and refusal were higher than expected. In the multivariable analysis, higher age, female sex, and employment as an allied health care professional were shown to be significantly associated with hesitation/refusal, while being born abroad turned out to be protective. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that approximately a quarter of HCWs were not immune to HBV infection, and of these, more than half were hesitant towards or refused the booster dose. The risk of hesitation/refusal was higher with age in women and among allied health care staff. Based on these findings, further studies are needed to prospectively evaluate HBV seroprevalence, vaccination adherence, factors associated with hesitancy, and the effectiveness of health surveillance strategies in a high-risk population susceptible to infection.

Association between exposure to wind turbines and sleep disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

To date, there is scarce evidence on the association between sleep disorders and noise generated by wind turbines. We searched six relevant electronic databases from the inception to May 2023 for relevant articles. The methodological quality of the included articles was evaluated using the US National Institutes of Health tool. Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria. The overall prevalence of sleep disorders among residents close to wind turbines was 34% (95% Confidence Interval, 0.22-0.47). Univariate meta-regressions for distance and sound power level showed that at higher distance the prevalence of sleep disorders decreases (p = 0.010) and with a higher sound power level the prevalence increases (p = 0.037). Furthermore, this systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted that the overall quality of current research on this topic is poor, and the methods to measure the results are often based on subjective assessments and not validated questionnaires. In conclusion, our preliminary findings suggest that there may be a possible relation between exposure to wind turbines and sleep disorders, although no conclusions can be drawn in terms of causality due to the nature of the retrieved data and the poor quality of current evidence. Future studies should adopt a longitudinal design and focus on objective measurements, supported by validated subjective methods such as questionnaires.

The association between occupational asbestos exposure with the risk of incidence and mortality from prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence on the association between asbestos exposure and prostate cancer (PCa). Two recent meta-analyses have claimed that exposure is associated with increased PCa incidence and mortality, but they suffer from some methodological flaws. Given the potential importance of this research question, we aimed to perform a methodologically sound systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between occupational asbestos exposure and the incidence of and mortality from PCa. METHODS: We followed PRISMA guidelines to systematically search for pertinent articles in three relevant electronic databases: Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase, from their inception to July 2020. The methodological quality of included articles was evaluated using the US National Institutes of Health tool. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) for PCa, as well as respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were extracted or calculated for each included cohort. Main and subgroup meta-analyses according to first year of employment, industry, asbestos type, and geographic region were performed. RESULTS: Sixty-five articles comprising 68 cohorts were included. PCa incidence and mortality were not significantly associated with occupational asbestos exposure (pooled SIR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.00-1.13, P = 0.062; pooled SMR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.06, P = 0.115). PCa incidence was higher among workers employed after 1960 (SIR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.01-1.20). Pooled SIR was elevated in European (SIR: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01-1.18) and UK cohorts (SIR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.09). Mortality was elevated in North American cohorts (SMR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10). Studies of lower methodological quality appeared to yield elevated SIRs or SMRs. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis provides evidence that men with occupational asbestos exposure have a PCa incidence and mortality similar to that of the general population. Temporal and geographical variables seem to be related to higher SMR or SIR.

The impact of COVID-19 on hospital-based workers influenza vaccination uptake: A two-year retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed at exploring 2020/2021 and 2019/2020 seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among healthcare and non-healthcare workers, hereafter hospital-based workers (HBWs); examining attitudes and motivations for uptake in the 2020/2021 season; and exploring the amount, types, and sources of information used by HBWs. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study. Socio-demographics, working profile, working area, and vaccination status data were collected. Motivations for vaccination uptake in the 2020/2021 season were also explored. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used. RESULTS: Overall, uptake increased from 14.8% in 2019/2020 to 31.7% in 2020/2021. Male workers show greater vaccination uptake than their female counterparts (20.4% vs. 12.6% in 2019/2020, and 36.5% vs. 29.8% in 2020/2021). Uptake increased for healthcare assistants (+8.9%), administrative/managerial staff (+17%), nurses/midwives (+17.1%), non-medical graduate staff (+22.8%), and physicians (+33.2%), while it decreased slightly for resident physicians despite still being one of the most vaccinated categories (-4.6%). Main reasons for vaccination were the desire to protect patients (33.0%) and relatives (51.1%). Lastly, 60.8% of HBWs relied on institutional sources of information; the remainder relied on non-institutional sources including social media and chatting with colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination uptake increased in the 2020/21 season. Tailored educational interventions are required on the impact of influenza in care settings, vaccine efficacy, and vaccination safety. Investments in improving HBWs' reliance on institutional sources, and their ability to find them, are also needed.

Vaccination Confidence among Healthcare Workers: Results from Two Anamnestic Questionnaires Adopted in the COVID-19 and Influenza Campaign.

BACKGROUND: Following the announcement of the development of COVID-19 vaccines, hesitancy about the safety of vaccinations and their side effects have spread, despite having the approval of international drug agencies. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that concern about side effects may have led people to fill out the COVID-19 anamnestic vaccine questionnaire with greater attention compared to the similar instrument used for the influenza vaccination. METHODS: We analyzed vaccination questionnaires of 218 healthcare workers (HCWs) who underwent both COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in 2020/2021. Outcomes included self-reported allergies, chronic pharmacological treatments, and chronic diseases. We tested the difference in prevalence, analyzed differences using the kappa statistics and concordance correlation, and explored factors associated with differences in reporting. RESULTS: HCWs reported more allergies to substances other than drugs and a higher prevalence of chronic drug intake in the COVID-19 questionnaires than in the influenza ones. Technical staff reported more drug allergies than physicians, and other HCWs reported more outcomes than physicians in the COVID-19 questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: We found that this population of HCWs reported higher conditions during the 2020 COVID-19 vaccination campaign compared to that of the influenza vaccine. The identification of socio-demographic characteristics of the less vaccine-confident HCWs could help in planning targeted interventions to enhance vaccine adherence.

Choosing between Homologous or Heterologous COVID-19 Vaccination Regimens: A Cross-Sectional Study among the General Population in Italy.

A shortage of COVID-19 vaccines and reports of side-effects led several countries to recommend a heterologous regimen for second vaccine doses. This study aimed to describe the reasons behind individuals' choices of a homologous or a heterologous second vaccination. This cross-sectional study enrolled individuals under 60 who had received a first dose of Vaxzevria and could choose between a homologous or heterologous regimen for their second dose. Quantitative (socio-demographic, clinical characteristics) and qualitative data were collected and analysed through a generalized linear model and thematic analysis, respectively. Of the 1437 individuals included in the analysis, the majority (76.1%) chose a heterologous second dose of the COVID-19 vaccination. More females chose a heterologous vaccination regimen (p = 0.003). Younger individuals also tended to choose heterologous vaccination (p < 0.001). The main motivation in favour of heterologous vaccination was to follow the Italian Ministry of Health recommendations (n = 118; 53.9%). This study showed that most individuals, mainly younger people and females, chose a heterologous dose of COVID-19 vaccination after their first viral vector vaccine. Heterologous vaccinations could be an effective public health measure to control the pandemic as they are a safe and efficient alternative to homologous regimens.

SARS-CoV-2 Breakthrough Infections: Incidence and Risk Factors in a Large European Multicentric Cohort of Health Workers.

BACKGROUND: The research aimed to investigate the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections and their determinants in a large European cohort of more than 60,000 health workers. METHODS: A multicentric retrospective cohort study, involving 12 European centers, was carried out within the ORCHESTRA project, collecting data up to 18 November 2021 on fully vaccinated health workers. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections was investigated with its association with occupational and social-demographic characteristics (age, sex, job title, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, antibody titer levels, and time from the vaccination course completion). RESULTS: Among 64,172 health workers from 12 European health centers, 797 breakthrough infections were observed (cumulative incidence of 1.2%). The primary analysis using individual data on 8 out of 12 centers showed that age and previous infection significantly modified breakthrough infection rates. In the meta-analysis of aggregated data from all centers, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and the standardized antibody titer were inversely related to the risk of breakthrough infection (p = 0.008 and p = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSION: The inverse correlation of antibody titer with the risk of breakthrough infection supports the evidence that vaccination plays a primary role in infection prevention, especially in health workers. Cellular immunity, previous clinical conditions, and vaccination timing should be further investigated.