RESUMO
Comparing deaths averted by vaccination campaigns is a crucial public health endeavour. Excess all-cause deaths better reflect the impact of the pandemic than COVID-19 deaths. We used a seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average with exogenous factors model to regress daily all-cause deaths on annual trend, seasonality, and environmental temperature in three Italian regions (Lombardy, Marche and Sicily) from 2015 to 2019. The model was used to forecast excess deaths during the vaccinal period (December 2020-October 2022). We used the prevented fraction to estimate excess deaths observed during the vaccinal campaigns, those which would have occurred without vaccination, and those averted by the campaigns. At the end of the vaccinal period, the Lombardy region proceeded with a more intensive COVID-19 vaccination campaign than other regions (on average, 1.82 doses per resident, versus 1.67 and 1.56 in Marche and Sicily, respectively). A higher prevented fraction of all-cause deaths was consistently found in Lombardy (65% avoided deaths, as opposed to 60% and 58% in Marche and Sicily). Nevertheless, because of a lower excess mortality rate found in Lombardy compared to Marche and Sicily (12, 24 and 23 per 10,000 person-years, respectively), a lower rate of averted deaths was observed (22 avoided deaths per 10,000 person-years, versus 36 and 32 in Marche and Sicily). In Lombardy, early and full implementation of adult COVID-19 vaccination was associated with the largest reduction in all-cause deaths compared to Marche and Sicily.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: A structured approach involves systematic management of trauma patients. We aim to conduct an overview of reviews about the clinical efficacy and safety of structured approach (i.e., primary and secondary survey) by guideline checklist compared to non-structured approach (i.e. clinical examination); moreover, routine screening whole-body computer tomography (WBCT) was compared to non-routine WBCT in patients with suspected major trauma. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews up to 3 May 2022. Systematic reviews (SRs) that investigated the use of a structured approach compared to a non-structured approach were eligible. Two authors independently extracted data, managed the overlapping of primary studies belonging to the included SRs and calculated the corrected covered area (CCA). The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: We included nine SRs investigating two comparisons in stable trauma patients: structured approach vs non-structured approach (n = 1) and routine WBCT vs non-routine WBCT (n = 8). The overlap of included primary studies was generally high across outcomes (CCA ranged between 20.85 and 42.86%) with some discrepancies in the directions of effects across reviews. The application of a structured approach by checklist may improve adherence to guidelines (e.g. Advanced Trauma Life Support) during resuscitation and might lead to a reduction in mortality among severely injured patients as compared to clinical examination (Adjusted OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.30-0.89; p = 0.018; low certainty of evidence). The use of routine WBCT seems to offer little to no effects in reducing mortality and time spent in emergency room or department, whereas non-routine WBCT seems to offer little to no effects in reducing radiation dose, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS (low-to-moderate certainty of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The application of structured approach by checklist during trauma resuscitation may improve patient- and process-related outcomes. Including non-routine WBCT seems to offer the best trade-offs between benefits and harm. Clinicians should consider these findings in the light of their clinical context, the volume of patients in their facilities, the need for time management, and costs.