11 research outputs found
Strengthening and promoting digital health practice: results from a Global Digital Health Partnership’s survey
Background and objectiveThe capacity to promote and disseminate the best evidence-based practices in terms of digital health innovations and technologies represents an important goal for countries and governments. To support the digital health maturity across countries the Global Digital Health Partnership (GDHP) was established in 2019. The mission of the GDHP is to facilitate global collaboration and knowledge-sharing in the design of digital health services, through the administration of surveys and white papers.ObjectiveThe scope of this study is to critically analyze and discuss results from the Evidence and Evaluation GDHP Work Stream’s survey, understand how governments and countries intend to address main obstacles to the digital health implementation, identify their strategies for a communication of effective digital health services, and promote the sharing of international based best practices on digital health.MethodsThis survey followed a cross-sectional study approach. A multiple-choice questionnaire was designed to gather data. Choices were extracted from research publications retrieved through a rapid review.ResultsOut of 29 countries receiving the survey, 10 returned it. On a scale from 1 to 5, eHealth systems/platforms (mean = 3.56) were indicated as the most important tool for centralized infrastructure to collect information on digital health, while primary care (mean = 4.0) represented the most voted item for healthcare services to collect information on digital health. Seven Countries out of 10 identified lack of organization, skepticism of clinicians, and accessibility of the population as a barriers to adopt digital health implementation, resulting to be the most voted items. Finally, the most endorsed priorities in digital health for Countries were the adoption of data-driven approaches (6 Countries), and telehealth (5 Countries).ConclusionThis survey highlighted the main tools and obstacles for countries to promote the implementation of evidence-based digital health innovations. Identifying strategies that would communicate the value of health care information technology to healthcare professionals are particularly imperative. Effective communication programs for clinicians and the general population in addition to improved digital health literacy (both for clinicians and citizens) will be the key for the real implementation of future digital health technologies
Knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors toward COVID-19 vaccination in a sample of Italian healthcare workers
Vaccine hesitancy in healthcare workers (HCWs) has been studied for various contagious diseases, but there is still insufficient knowledge about this phenomenon for COVID-19. We developed and validated a knowledge, attitude, and practice survey of 39 questions to assess Italian HCWs' hesitancy toward vaccination in general (general hesitancy), COVID-19 vaccination (COVID-19 hesitancy), and public health injunctive measures (refusal of obligations). The survey was administered through a web platform between July and November 2021. Three multivariable logistic regressions were performed to evaluate the association between the explored dimensions of hesitancy and the potential determinants investigated. Out of 2,132 respondents with complete answers, 17.0% showed to be generally hesitancy toward vaccination, 32.3% were hesitant on COVID-19 vaccination, while 18.8% were categorized as refusing obligations. A significant protective effect against all three dimensions of hesitancy was found for increasing fear of COVID-19, advising COVID-19 vaccination to relatives and patients, having received flu vaccination in the previous year and having higher levels of education. Better self-rated knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines and reading up institutional sources were significantly protective against general and COVID-19 hesitancy, while being a physician rather than another healthcare professional was protective only against COVID-19 hesitancy. Conversely, increasing age and referring to colleagues to expand knowledge about COVID-19 were positively associated with COVID-19 hesitancy. The determinants of general hesitancy, COVID-19 hesitancy and the refusal of obligations are mostly overlapping. Given the great influence they exert on patients and communities, it is pivotal to limit HCWs vaccine hesitancy through appropriate training activities
Factors Influencing the Choice to Advise for or against COVID-19 Vaccination in the Physicians and Dentists of an Italian Region
Healthcare workers (HCWs), particularly physicians, are a relevant and trusted source of information for patients, especially when health-related choices such as vaccination are concerned. Between July and November 2022, we administered a web-based survey to physicians and dentists living in the Latio region of Italy to explore whether their background might affect their willingness to recommend the COVID-19 vaccination to their patients (RCVtoPat) and their relatives (RCVtoRel). We performed a multivariable logistic regression to study the association between the two outcomes (RCVtoPat and RCVtoRel) and their potential determinants in our sample (n = 1464). We found that being a dentist, an increasing fear of COVID-19, and having been previously vaccinated against flu are positively associated with both RCVtoPat and RCVtoRel, while a better self-rated knowledge of COVID-19 vaccines is associated only with RCVtoRel. No role was found for age, sex, civil status, education level, information sources, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and chronic diseases. A subgroup analysis of physicians alone (n = 1305) demonstrated a positive association with RCVtoRel of being specialized in diagnostic/therapeutic services and a negative effect on RCVtoPat of being trained in general practice. We provide useful insights about the factors that should be addressed to ensure HCWs exert a positive influence on their patients and communities
A real opportunity to modify cardiovascular risk through primary care and prevention: A pilot study
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) represent a major threat to health and primary prevention outstands as the most effective instrument to face this issue, addressing multiple risk factors at a time and influencing behavioral patterns. Community nurses have been involved in many interdisciplinary prevention activities, resulting in effective control of CV risk factors. We conducted a pilot study aiming at describing the impact on the CV risk profile of an 18-month interdisciplinary intervention on lifestyle habits. From September 2018 to May 2020, four general practitioners (GPs) working in the Roman neighborhood of Torresina recruited patients having a cardiovascular risk score (CRS) equal to or higher than 3% and lower than 20%; those patients were included in a nutritional, physical, and psychological counseling program. Assessments of patients' health status were led at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months by a nutritionist, a physiotherapist, a psychologist, their GPs, and a community nurse. The CRS was estimated at every examination, based on the Italian Progetto Cuore algorithm. A total of 76 patients were included (mean age of 54.6 years; 33 men and 43 women). Mean CRS showed a significant reduction between baseline and 12 months (from 4.9 to 3.8); both total cholesterol and systolic blood pressure (SBP) significantly decreased at 6 months of follow-up (respectively, from 211.1 to 192 and from 133.1 to 123.1). Nonetheless, the reduction was later maintained only for SBP. However, during the last 6 months of the intervention, the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, thus, it is not possible to know how much the results achieved at 18 months were influenced by the restrictive measures introduced by the Italian government. When stratifying according to the presence of hypertension/diabetes and physical activity, no differences in the CRS could be highlighted between the two groups. Our pilot study proved that an interdisciplinary counseling intervention program can improve CV risk profile and could be further spread to people that, according to their CRS, would benefit more from changes in lifestyles
Co-administration of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza vaccines in healthcare workers: Results of two vaccination campaigns in a large teaching hospital in Rome
ABSTRACTThe concurrent administration of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines has arisen as a promising approach to bolster protection against respiratory pathogens and improve vaccination rates. However, there remains a lack of data regarding the prevalence of co-administration across several vaccination campaigns, especially among healthcare workers (HCWs). Therefore, this study aims to shed light on the acceptance of co-administration strategies among HCWs during the two campaigns following the introduction of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. A retrospective cohort study was conducted among the HCWs of the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, a research hospital in Rome. Hospital administrative databases were accessed to gather information about vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza during the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 vaccination campaigns. The study included 7399 HCWs. The co-administration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 and influenza vaccines presented a significant rise in 2022/2023 compared to the previous vaccination campaign (+38%): this was confirmed for every professional category, with the largest increases among resident doctors (+47%) and physicians (+44%), and also for every age category, but it was particularly evident for the youngest health professionals. The probability of co-administration uptake during the 2022/2023 campaign was significantly higher for males, and for those that received co-administration during the 2021/2022 campaign, while the probability was lower for nurses and administrative staff. This study highlights the co-administration procedure as a valuable and effective tool in annual vaccination campaigns for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza. The procedure’s safety and streamlined logistics make it increasingly attractive for implementation, particularly among HCWs
Social media and attitudes towards a COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review of the literature
Background: Vaccine hesitancy continues to limit global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging research demonstrates the role of social media in disseminating information and potentially influencing people's attitudes towards public health campaigns. This systematic review sought to synthesize the current evidence regarding the potential role of social media in shaping COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, and to explore its potential for shaping public health interventions to address the issue of vaccine hesitancy. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the studies published from inception to 13 of March2022 by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsychNET, Scopus, CINAHL, and MEDLINE. Studies that reported outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (attitudes, opinion, etc.) gathered from the social media platforms, and those analyzing the relationship between social media use and COVID-19 hesitancy/acceptance were included. Studies that reported no outcome of interest or analyzed data from sources other than social media (websites, newspapers, etc.) will be excluded. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all cross-sectional studies included in this review. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021283219). Findings: Of the 2539 records identified, a total of 156 articles fully met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the quality of the cross-sectional studies was moderate - 2 studies received 10 stars, 5 studies received 9 stars, 9 studies were evaluated with 8, 12 studies with 7,16 studies with 6, 11 studies with 5, and 6 studies with 4 stars. The included studies were categorized into four categories. Cross-sectional studies reporting the association between reliance on social media and vaccine intentions mainly observed a negative relationship. Studies that performed thematic analyses of extracted social media data, mainly observed a domination of vaccine hesitant topics. Studies that explored the degree of polarization of specific social media contents related to COVID-19 vaccines observed a similar degree of content for both positive and negative tone posted on different social media platforms. Finally, studies that explored the fluctuations of vaccination attitudes/opinions gathered from social media identified specific events as significant cofactors that affect and shape vaccination intentions of individuals. Interpretation: This thorough examination of the various roles social media can play in disseminating information to the public, as well as how individuals behave on social media in the context of public health events, articulates the potential of social media as a platform of public health intervention to address vaccine hesitancy. Funding: None
Risk of Infection and Duration of Protection after the Booster Dose of the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine BNT162b2 among Healthcare Workers in a Large Teaching Hospital in Italy: Results of an Observational Study
The efficacy of the first schedule of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines has decreased after the surge of the Delta variant, posing the need to administer a booster dose to enhance the neutralising immune response. This study aims at evaluating the duration of protection given by the booster dose of Pfizer–BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in healthcare workers (HCWs) of a large teaching hospital in Rome and to analyse the factors associated with post-booster vaccination infections. Data about vaccinations of HCWs with the BNT162b2 vaccine and nasal swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 were extracted from the digital archives of the hospital from 27 September 2021 to 31 May 2022. In total, 5770 HCWs were observed. The cumulative risk of becoming infected by SARS-CoV-2 increased with time (2.5% at 4 weeks, 17% at 12 weeks and 40% at 24 weeks) and was significantly higher for females, younger classes of patients and for those who had developed a hybrid immunity (natural infection plus one dose, namely the primary schedule, added to the booster dose) compared to those who had completed the three doses. This study describes the duration and the determinants of the protection against infections after the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of vaccine-induced immunogenicity
Three-year COVID-19 and flu vaccinations among medical residents in a tertiary hospital in Italy: The threat of acceptance decline in seasonal campaigns
: The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Italy started in December 2020, and, due to the Omicron variant's emergence, a second booster dose was recommended for high-risk individuals and healthcare workers from July 2022. The aim of the study was to evaluate the vaccination coverages for the COVID-19 second booster dose and to identify predictors of its acceptance within the population of medical residents (MRs) of the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS (FPG) University Hospital. The study was conducted at FPG from October 4th to December 21st, 2022, and COVID-19 second booster dose and influenza vaccines were administered. The study analyzed collected data and conducted multivariate logistic regressions to explore potential predictors of vaccination adherence. The analyses performed were compared with the sample enrolled in FPG residency programs at the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. 1968 MRs were involved in the 2022-2023 vaccination campaign (mean age 28.97, SD 3.44), and the second booster dose of COVID-19 vaccination coverage was low (18.80%). Almost all participants opted for co-administration of COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations, leading to a similar rate of influenza vaccination coverage (16.26%). Being a frontline resident, meaning a direct involvement in managing COVID-19 patients and vaccination campaigns, was the main predictor of vaccination adherence (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.25-2.17). The dropping in influenza vaccination coverage in 2022-2023 and the low adherence to COVID-19 second booster dose among young physicians is concerning, calling for tailored vaccination campaigns and interventions
Flu and COVID-19 Vaccination: What Happens to the Flu Shot When the Campaigns Overlap? Experience from a Large Italian Research Hospital
Influenza represents a threat to global health and health care workers (HCWs) have an increased risk of contracting the influenza virus in the workplace. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought back the importance of influenza vaccination, as the influenza virus can circulate together with SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this report is to describe the actual flu vaccination coverage among healthcare workers of a research hospital and the trend changes, with respect to the past flu vaccination campaigns, in light of the present pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination. A Pearson’s χ2 test was used to test the correlation of flu vaccination coverage, across all professional categories, between the last two years. A linear regression model was adopted to predict the total vaccination coverage of this year. A statistically significant decrease (p < 0.01) was observed in vaccination coverage among all the professional categories with a 50% reduction in vaccination trends between the last two years. Analyzing the data from the previous six flu vaccination campaigns, the expected value, according to the linear regression model, was estimated to be 38.5% while the observed value was 24%. The decrease in vaccination coverage may be due to the fear of the pandemic situation and especially to the uncertainty related to the consequences of a concurrent administration which may overload the immune system or may be more reactogenic. The COVID-19 pandemic represents an opportunity to promote and support large-scale influenza vaccination among HCWs through structured programs, adequate funding, and tailored communication strategie
COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign among the Health Workers of Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS: A Cost–Benefit Analysis
Vaccinations generate health, economic and social benefits in both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. The aim of this study was to conduct a cost–benefit analysis to estimate the costs and benefits associated with the COVID-19 vaccination campaign for health workers in Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS (FPG). The analysis included 5152 healthcare workers who voluntarily received the Pfizer–BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, divided into physicians, nurses and other health workers. Data about vaccine cost, administration and materials were derived from administrative databases of the FPG from 28 December 2020 to 31 March 2021. The costs associated with the COVID-19 vaccination campaign amounted to EUR 2,221,768, while the benefits equaled EUR 10,345,847. The benefit-to-cost ratio resulted in EUR 4.66, while the societal return on investment showed a ratio of EUR 3.66. The COVID-19 vaccination campaign for health workers in FPG has high social returns and it strengthens the need to inform and update decision-making about the economic and social benefits associated with a vaccination campaign. Health economic evaluations on vaccines should always be considered by decision-makers when considering the inclusion of a new vaccine into the national program