Resources for assessing parents’ vaccine hesitancy: a systematic review of the literature

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is a complex and country-specific issue, responsible for the decreasing vaccination rate and subsequent spread of vaccine-preventable diseases. In literature, several questionnaires were developed to assess VH. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the published questionnaires assessing parental VH. The search was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library, in December 2017, following the PRISMA guidelines. The search strategy included 4 types of keywords: parents, vaccine hesitancy/acceptance, immunization and survey. Only English and Italian original papers were included. 17 reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Only the included articles were downloaded in full and, after a second screening, data were extracted and recorded in an ad hoc spreadsheet. A total of 5,139 articles were retrieved, after duplicates elimination 3,508 papers were screened. After a screening selection, 334 studies were included in the analysis. Most studies were cross-sectional (92.8%), followed by case-control (4.8%) and cohort studies (2.4%). The population interviewed was mainly parents, without any further details (73.1%); mothers were the only parent surveyed in approximately 20% of the studies, while only 1 study involved selectively the fathers. The sample size ranged from 7 to 59,897. Only 38% of the included studies reported both the number and type of items used. Regarding the type, more than half consisted of closed questions, followed by Likert scales, while open-ended questions were used in 14.8% of the surveys. Frequently, the survey was conducted using a self-reported questionnaire or interview. The questionnaires were mostly administered on paper, while online forms were used in 20.1% of the cases. However, 80.2% of the questionnaires were not attached to the paper. HPV vaccine was the most frequently investigated (39.2%), followed by influenza (13.5%) and measles (10.8%). While 22.4% of the articles referred to paediatrics vaccinations in general. Data about the immunization behaviours were reported in 294 studies: the subjects involved showed a behaviour defined as “acceptance” in 129 studies (38.6%), as “hesitancy/scepticism/doubt” in 145 studies (43.1%) and as “refusal” in 22 studies (6.6%). This information was not reported in 12% of the studies. VH is still a public health challenge, as confirmed by the high number of studies and questionnaires retrieved. This study offers a deeper perspec- tive on the available questionnaires, helping to identify the best one in terms of aim and study setting.     &nbsp

"Delirium Day": A nationwide point prevalence study of delirium in older hospitalized patients using an easy standardized diagnostic tool

Background: To date, delirium prevalence in adult acute hospital populations has been estimated generally from pooled findings of single-center studies and/or among specific patient populations. Furthermore, the number of participants in these studies has not exceeded a few hundred. To overcome these limitations, we have determined, in a multicenter study, the prevalence of delirium over a single day among a large population of patients admitted to acute and rehabilitation hospital wards in Italy. Methods: This is a point prevalence study (called "Delirium Day") including 1867 older patients (aged 65 years or more) across 108 acute and 12 rehabilitation wards in Italian hospitals. Delirium was assessed on the same day in all patients using the 4AT, a validated and briefly administered tool which does not require training. We also collected data regarding motoric subtypes of delirium, functional and nutritional status, dementia, comorbidity, medications, feeding tubes, peripheral venous and urinary catheters, and physical restraints. Results: The mean sample age was 82.0 ± 7.5 years (58 % female). Overall, 429 patients (22.9 %) had delirium. Hypoactive was the commonest subtype (132/344 patients, 38.5 %), followed by mixed, hyperactive, and nonmotoric delirium. The prevalence was highest in Neurology (28.5 %) and Geriatrics (24.7 %), lowest in Rehabilitation (14.0 %), and intermediate in Orthopedic (20.6 %) and Internal Medicine wards (21.4 %). In a multivariable logistic regression, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.05), Activities of Daily Living dependence (OR 1.19, 95 % CI 1.12-1.27), dementia (OR 3.25, 95 % CI 2.41-4.38), malnutrition (OR 2.01, 95 % CI 1.29-3.14), and use of antipsychotics (OR 2.03, 95 % CI 1.45-2.82), feeding tubes (OR 2.51, 95 % CI 1.11-5.66), peripheral venous catheters (OR 1.41, 95 % CI 1.06-1.87), urinary catheters (OR 1.73, 95 % CI 1.30-2.29), and physical restraints (OR 1.84, 95 % CI 1.40-2.40) were associated with delirium. Admission to Neurology wards was also associated with delirium (OR 2.00, 95 % CI 1.29-3.14), while admission to other settings was not. Conclusions: Delirium occurred in more than one out of five patients in acute and rehabilitation hospital wards. Prevalence was highest in Neurology and lowest in Rehabilitation divisions. The "Delirium Day" project might become a useful method to assess delirium across hospital settings and a benchmarking platform for future surveys

Colorectal Cancer Stage at Diagnosis Before vs During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy

IMPORTANCE Delays in screening programs and the reluctance of patients to seek medical attention because of the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 could be associated with the risk of more advanced colorectal cancers at diagnosis. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was associated with more advanced oncologic stage and change in clinical presentation for patients with colorectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included all 17 938 adult patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer from March 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021 (pandemic period), and from January 1, 2018, to February 29, 2020 (prepandemic period), in 81 participating centers in Italy, including tertiary centers and community hospitals. Follow-up was 30 days from surgery. EXPOSURES Any type of surgical procedure for colorectal cancer, including explorative surgery, palliative procedures, and atypical or segmental resections. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was advanced stage of colorectal cancer at diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were distant metastasis, T4 stage, aggressive biology (defined as cancer with at least 1 of the following characteristics: signet ring cells, mucinous tumor, budding, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and lymphangitis), stenotic lesion, emergency surgery, and palliative surgery. The independent association between the pandemic period and the outcomes was assessed using multivariate random-effects logistic regression, with hospital as the cluster variable. RESULTS A total of 17 938 patients (10 007 men [55.8%]; mean [SD] age, 70.6 [12.2] years) underwent surgery for colorectal cancer: 7796 (43.5%) during the pandemic period and 10 142 (56.5%) during the prepandemic period. Logistic regression indicated that the pandemic period was significantly associated with an increased rate of advanced-stage colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95%CI, 1.01-1.13; P = .03), aggressive biology (OR, 1.32; 95%CI, 1.15-1.53; P < .001), and stenotic lesions (OR, 1.15; 95%CI, 1.01-1.31; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cohort study suggests a significant association between the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the risk of a more advanced oncologic stage at diagnosis among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer and might indicate a potential reduction of survival for these patients

Clinical Features Associated with Delirium Motor Subtypes in Older Inpatients: Results of a Multicenter Study

Objective To date motor subtypes of delirium have been evaluated in single-center studies with a limited examination of the relationship between predisposing factors and motor profile of delirium. We sought to report the prevalence and clinical profile of subtypes of delirium in a multicenter study. Methods This is a point prevalence study nested in the â\u80\u9cDelirium Day 2015â\u80\u9d, which included 108 acute and 12 rehabilitation wards in Italy. Delirium was detected using the 4-AT and motor subtypes were measured with the Delirium Motor Subtype Scale (DMSS). A multinomial logistic regression was used to determine the factors associated with delirium subtypes. Results Of 429 patients with delirium, the DMSS was completed in 275 (64%), classifying 21.5% of the patients with hyperactive delirium, 38.5% with hypoactive, 27.3% with mixed and 12.7% with the non-motor subtype. The 4-AT score was higher in the hyperactive subtype, similar in the hypoactive, mixed subtypes, while it was lowest in the non-motor subtype. Dementia was associated with all three delirium motor subtypes (hyperactive, OR 3.3, 95% CI: 1.2-8.7; hypoactive, OR 2.8, 95% CI: 1.2-6.5; mixed OR 2.6, 95% CI: 1.1-6.2). Atypical antipsychotics were associated with hypoactive delirium (OR 0.23, 95% CI: 0.1-0.7), while intravenous lines were associated with mixed delirium (OR 2.9, 95% CI: 1.2-6.9). Conclusions The study shows that hypoactive delirium is the most common subtype among hospitalized older patients. Specific clinical features were associated with different delirium subtypes. The use of standardized instruments can help to characterize the phenomenology of different motor subtypes of delirium

"Delirium Day": A nationwide point prevalence study of delirium in older hospitalized patients using an easy standardized diagnostic tool

Background: To date, delirium prevalence in adult acute hospital populations has been estimated generally from pooled findings of single-center studies and/or among specific patient populations. Furthermore, the number of participants in these studies has not exceeded a few hundred. To overcome these limitations, we have determined, in a multicenter study, the prevalence of delirium over a single day among a large population of patients admitted to acute and rehabilitation hospital wards in Italy. Methods: This is a point prevalence study (called "Delirium Day") including 1867 older patients (aged 65 years or more) across 108 acute and 12 rehabilitation wards in Italian hospitals. Delirium was assessed on the same day in all patients using the 4AT, a validated and briefly administered tool which does not require training. We also collected data regarding motoric subtypes of delirium, functional and nutritional status, dementia, comorbidity, medications, feeding tubes, peripheral venous and urinary catheters, and physical restraints. Results: The mean sample age was 82.0 ± 7.5 years (58 % female). Overall, 429 patients (22.9 %) had delirium. Hypoactive was the commonest subtype (132/344 patients, 38.5 %), followed by mixed, hyperactive, and nonmotoric delirium. The prevalence was highest in Neurology (28.5 %) and Geriatrics (24.7 %), lowest in Rehabilitation (14.0 %), and intermediate in Orthopedic (20.6 %) and Internal Medicine wards (21.4 %). In a multivariable logistic regression, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.05), Activities of Daily Living dependence (OR 1.19, 95 % CI 1.12-1.27), dementia (OR 3.25, 95 % CI 2.41-4.38), malnutrition (OR 2.01, 95 % CI 1.29-3.14), and use of antipsychotics (OR 2.03, 95 % CI 1.45-2.82), feeding tubes (OR 2.51, 95 % CI 1.11-5.66), peripheral venous catheters (OR 1.41, 95 % CI 1.06-1.87), urinary catheters (OR 1.73, 95 % CI 1.30-2.29), and physical restraints (OR 1.84, 95 % CI 1.40-2.40) were associated with delirium. Admission to Neurology wards was also associated with delirium (OR 2.00, 95 % CI 1.29-3.14), while admission to other settings was not. Conclusions: Delirium occurred in more than one out of five patients in acute and rehabilitation hospital wards. Prevalence was highest in Neurology and lowest in Rehabilitation divisions. The "Delirium Day" project might become a useful method to assess delirium across hospital settings and a benchmarking platform for future surveys

The association of indwelling urinary catheter with delirium in hospitalized patients and nursing home residents: an explorative analysis from the "Delirium Day 2015"

BackroundUse of indwelling urinary catheter (IUC) in older adults has negative consequences, including delirium.AimThis analysis, from the Delirium Day 2015, a nationwide multicenter prevalence study, aim to evaluate the association of IUC with delirium in hospitalized and Nursing Homes (NHs) patients.MethodsPatients underwent a comprehensive geriatric assessment, including the presence of IUC; inclusion criteria were age>65 years, being Italian speaker and providing informed consent; exclusion criteria were coma, aphasia, end-of-life status. Delirium was assessed using the 4AT test (score4: possible delirium; scores 1-3: possible cognitive impairment).ResultsAmong 1867 hospitalized patients (mean age 82.07.5 years, 58% female), 539 (28.9%) had IUC, 429 (22.9%) delirium and 675 (36.1%) cognitive impairment. IUC was significantly associated with cognitive impairment (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.19-2.16) and delirium (2.45, 95% CI 1.73-3.47), this latter being significant also in the subset of patients without dementia (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.52-3.43). Inattention and impaired alertness were also independently associated with IUC. Among 1454 NHs residents (mean age 84.47.4 years, 70.% female), 63 (4.3%) had IUC, 535 (36.8%) a 4AT score4, and 653 (44.9%) a 4AT score 1-3. The multivariate logistic regression analysis did not show a significant association between 4AT test or its specific items with IUC, neither in the subset of patients without dementia.DiscussionWe confirmed a significant association between IUC and delirium in hospitalized patients but not in NHs residents.ConclusionEnvironmental and clinical factors of acute setting might contribute to IUC-associated delirium occurrence

Changes in surgicaL behaviOrs dUring the CoviD-19 pandemic. The SICE CLOUD19 Study

BACKGROUND: The spread of the SARS-CoV2 virus, which causes COVID-19 disease, profoundly impacted the surgical community. Recommendations have been published to manage patients needing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey, under the aegis of the Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery, aims to analyze how Italian surgeons have changed their practice during the pandemic.METHODS: The authors designed an online survey that was circulated for completion to the Italian departments of general surgery registered in the Italian Ministry of Health database in December 2020. Questions were divided into three sections: hospital organization, screening policies, and safety profile of the surgical operation. The investigation periods were divided into the Italian pandemic phases I (March-May 2020), II (June-September 2020), and III (October-December 2020).RESULTS: Of 447 invited departments, 226 answered the survey. Most hospitals were treating both COVID-19-positive and -negative patients. The reduction in effective beds dedicated to surgical activity was significant, affecting 59% of the responding units. 12.4% of the respondents in phase I, 2.6% in phase II, and 7.7% in phase III reported that their surgical unit had been closed. 51.4%, 23.5%, and 47.8% of the respondents had at least one colleague reassigned to non-surgical COVID-19 activities during the three phases. There has been a reduction in elective (>200 procedures: 2.1%, 20.6% and 9.9% in the three phases, respectively) and emergency (<20 procedures: 43.3%, 27.1%, 36.5% in the three phases, respectively) surgical activity. The use of laparoscopy also had a setback in phase I (25.8% performed less than 20% of elective procedures through laparoscopy). 60.6% of the respondents used a smoke evacuation device during laparoscopy in phase I, 61.6% in phase II, and 64.2% in phase III. Almost all responders (82.8% vs. 93.2% vs. 92.7%) in each analyzed period did not modify or reduce the use of high-energy devices.CONCLUSION: This survey offers three faithful snapshots of how the surgical community has reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic during its three phases. The significant reduction in surgical activity indicates that better health policies and more evidence-based guidelines are needed to make up for lost time and surgery not performed during the pandemic

Effect of centre volume on pathological outcomes and postoperative complications after surgery for colorectal cancer: results of a multicentre national study

Background: The association between volume, complications and pathological outcomes is still under debate regarding colorectal cancer surgery. The aim of the study was to assess the association between centre volume and severe complications, mortality, less-than-radical oncologic surgery, and indications for neoadjuvant therapy.Methods: Retrospective analysis of 16,883 colorectal cancer cases from 80 centres (2018-2021). Outcomes: 30-day mortality; Clavien-Dindo grade >2 complications; removal of >= 12 lymph nodes; non-radical resection; neoadjuvant therapy. Quartiles of hospital volumes were classified as LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, and VERY HIGH. Independent predictors, both overall and for rectal cancer, were evaluated using logistic regression including age, gender, AJCC stage and cancer site.Results: LOW-volume centres reported a higher rate of severe postoperative complications (OR 1.50, 95% c.i. 1.15-1.096, P = 0.003). The rate of >= 12 lymph nodes removed in LOW-volume (OR 0.68, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.85, P = 12 lymph nodes removed was lower in LOW-volume than in VERY HIGH-volume centres (OR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.41-0.80, P = 0.001). A lower rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with HIGH (OR 0.66, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.77, P < 0.001), MEDIUM (OR 0.75, 95% c.i. 0.60-0.92, P = 0.006), and LOW (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.52-0.94, P = 0.019) volume centres (vs. VERY HIGH).Conclusion: Colorectal cancer surgery in low-volume centres is at higher risk of suboptimal management, poor postoperative outcomes, and less-than-adequate oncologic resections. Centralisation of rectal cancer cases should be taken into consideration to optimise the outcomes