Interprofessional collaboration between different health care professions in emilia romagna

Background and aim of the work: Interprofessional collaboration in the healthcare sector contributes to the delivery of high quality and safe services to patients across different subdivisions of the healthcare system which is faced with constant challenges. The international literature offers a plethora of tools for assessing the collaboration between health workers, but only a few of these have been validated in the Italian language. One that has undergone such validation is the interprofessional collaboration (IPC) scale, which measures the perception of collaboration among health professionals. An advantage of this scale is that is addresses all workers within the system, and is not limited to specific professions. The aim of the present study was to apply the validated Italian version of the IPC scale, to a context different to the one used for its validation, to measure the level of collaboration between different health care workers. Method: A questionnaire-based study was conducted on a sample consisting of 329 health professionals working at Azienda USL-IRCCS in Reggio Emilia. The categorical and continuous variables were analysed using descriptive statistics (frequen-cies, percentages and standard deviations). Results: The IPC scale showed physicians to express the highest level of collaboration with other professionals, in line with the results of other studies in the literature. The values calculated for the factors “accommodation” and “communication” were higher than for “isolation”, de-picting a good level collaboration. The only case in which the isolation factor, which describes an absence of collaboration, was equal to the other two factors was in relation to the evaluation of midwives by nursing aides/orderlies. Conclusions: In conclusion, the Italian version of the IPC scale provides a useful instrument for measuring interprofessional collaboration between workers in the healthcare sector. In the present study, it revealed a satisfactory level of collaboration between health professionals in an organization located in Emilia Romagna, Italy. (www.actabiomedica.it)

The description of population vulnerability in Quantitative Risk Analysis

The description of the distribution of population in the potential impact areas of accident scenarios is of utmost importance for the assessment of the final consequences of potential accidents. Vulnerability centres (i.e. sites where the simultaneous presence of a relevant number of persons in a narrow area is anticipated) may play an important role in this framework. In the present study a method for the correct and detailed description of off-site target population in potential impact areas of major accidents is developed. The method aimed at supporting quantitative risk analysis studies, emergency planning and land-use planning. An approach is suggested to define the population categories that should be taken into account and to provide criteria for indoor and outdoor population distribution in vulnerability centres. Case studies are also provided in order to understand the outcomes and the potentialities of the methodology

22nd International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction

I contributi scientifici raccolti e presentati nel Convegno ISARC 2005 illustrano criteri, metodologie e tecniche per un incremento dei processi di automazione e della robotica nel campo delle costruzioni meccaniche, industriali e civil

Fecal microbiota transplantation for the treatment of recurrent and severe Clostridium difficile infection in solid organ transplant recipients: A multicenter experience

Fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) is recommended for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) treatment; however, use in solid organ transplantation (SOT) patients has theoretical safety concerns. This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated FMT safety, effectiveness, and risk factors for failure in SOT patients. Primary cure and overall cure were defined as resolution of diarrhea or negative C difficile stool test after a single FMT or after subsequent FMT(s) ± anti-CDI antibiotics, respectively. Ninety-four SOT patients underwent FMT, 78% for recurrent CDI and 22% for severe or fulminant CDI. FMT-related adverse events (AE) occurred in 22.3% of cases, mainly comprising self-limiting conditions including nausea, abdominal pain, and FMT-related diarrhea. Severe AEs occurred in 3.2% of cases, with no FMT-related bacteremia. After FMT, 25% of patients with underlying inflammatory bowel disease had worsening disease activity, while 14% of cytomegalovirus-seropositive patients had reactivation. At 3 months, primary cure was 58.7%, while overall cure was 91.3%. Predictors of failing a single FMT included inpatient status, severe and fulminant CDI, presence of pseudomembranous colitis, and use of non-CDI antibiotics at the time of FMT. These data suggest FMT is safe in SOT patients. However, repeated FMT(s) or additional antibiotics may be needed to optimize rates of cure with FMT

Fecal microbiota transplantation for the treatment of recurrent and severe Clostridium difficile infection in solid organ transplant recipients: A multicenter experience

Fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) is recommended for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) treatment; however, use in solid organ transplantation (SOT) patients has theoretical safety concerns. This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated FMT safety, effectiveness, and risk factors for failure in SOT patients. Primary cure and overall cure were defined as resolution of diarrhea or negative C difficile stool test after a single FMT or after subsequent FMT(s) ± anti‐CDI antibiotics, respectively. Ninety‐four SOT patients underwent FMT, 78% for recurrent CDI and 22% for severe or fulminant CDI. FMT‐related adverse events (AE) occurred in 22.3% of cases, mainly comprising self‐limiting conditions including nausea, abdominal pain, and FMT‐related diarrhea. Severe AEs occurred in 3.2% of cases, with no FMT‐related bacteremia. After FMT, 25% of patients with underlying inflammatory bowel disease had worsening disease activity, while 14% of cytomegalovirus‐seropositive patients had reactivation. At 3 months, primary cure was 58.7%, while overall cure was 91.3%. Predictors of failing a single FMT included inpatient status, severe and fulminant CDI, presence of pseudomembranous colitis, and use of non‐CDI antibiotics at the time of FMT. These data suggest FMT is safe in SOT patients. However, repeated FMT(s) or additional antibiotics may be needed to optimize rates of cure with FMT