Gabriella Nucera

The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy has posed challenges in managing infectious diseases like coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While science teachers have the potential to promote health literacy and influence community attitudes, there is a paucity of research on their vaccination behaviors and perceptions related to COVID-19. The study aimed to investigate the relationship between knowledge, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccination statuses among pre-service science teachers in South Africa. Final-year Bachelor of Education pre-service life sciences teachers (n = 182) in South Africa were surveyed using a previously validated closed-ended questionnaire. Regression analyses were employed to discern influential factors on vaccination behavior. Most participants demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of COVID-19’s nature and symptoms, along with the efficacy and safety of vaccines. Nevertheless, prominent misconceptions emerged, such as the misbelief that the SARS-CoV-2 virus does not cause COVID-19 and that vaccines can modify human deoxyribonucleic acid. Regression analyses found a notable correlation between the attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines and actual vaccination status. This study emphasizes the pressing need to rectify prevailing health-related misconceptions and attitudes in teacher education programs to enhance teachers’ role in influencing students’ health behaviors and beliefs.

Background: Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) in pediatric populations is a rare yet critical medical emergency characterized by high mortality and significant neurological impairment among survivors. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to synthesize existing evidence on pediatric resuscitation techniques, focusing on survival rates, neurological outcomes, and the effectiveness of chest compression-only resuscitation (HCPR) versus standard resuscitation (CCPR), thereby addressing current gaps in clinical understanding and informing future guidelines. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for trials comparing HCPR versus CCPR during pediatric resuscitation. We used a comparative meta-analysis to estimate the odds ratio of prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), 1-month survival rate, and survival with favorable neurological outcome. Study level odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using random effects. Results: Prehospital ROSC incidence did not significantly differ between HCPR and CCPR, including subgroup analysis based on cause of cardiac arrest. One-month survival rate was 12.3% in HCPR and 18.0% in CCPR (p = 0.04). Additionally, HCPR was less effective in non-cardiac arrest cases and in children over one year of age. Favorable neurological outcomes at one month were also lower for HCPR (6.3%) compared to CCPR (9.0%; p < 0.001), with similar trends observed across subgroups of non-cardiac arrest origin and varying age groups. Conclusions: A pediatric resuscitation technique based solely on chest compressions shows lower efficacy in terms of survival at one month and quality of return of neurological function compared to standard resuscitation. Keywords: pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation techniques survival rate efficacy chest compression

The Visceral Sensitivity Index (VSI) represents a significant advancement in the assessment of gastrointestinal-specific anxiety among patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD)—such as ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. However, an Italian version of the instrument is not yet available for the Italian-speaking population. This study utilized a national sample of 500 individuals divided into four groups: (a) patients with Crohn’s disease, (b) patients with ulcerative colitis, (c) patients with IBS, and (d) healthy controls (individuals without any diagnoses) to test the validity and reliability of the Italian VSI. Using back-translation methodology to ensure translation fidelity, this research applied a questionnaire and the VSI through an online format to 500 participants. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) revealed that the Italian VSI had excellent psychometric properties, demonstrating high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.949) and construct validity. The scale proved sensitive in detecting significant differences in visceral sensitivity among groups, highlighting its utility as a clinical and research assessment tool. Specifically, the Italian VSI exhibited a unidimensional factorial structure and maintained a strong correlation with interoceptive awareness, type of disease, and gastrointestinal symptom severity, confirming its role in enhancing the understanding and management of IBD and IBS in Italy.

The third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic has commenced. To avert increase in cases and avert preventable deaths, community engagement strategies such as the promotion of vaccination, voluntary testing and debunking of COVID-19-related rumors need to be undertaken.

The VSI represents a significant advancement in the assessment of gastrointestinal-specific anxiety among patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) and other Chronic Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD). However, an Italian version of the instrument is not yet available for the reference population. This study utilized a national sample of 500 individuals, including healthy controls and patients with Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease, to test the validity and reliability of the Italian VSI. Using back-translation methodology to ensure translation fidelity, the research applied a questionnaire and the VSI through an online format to 500 participants. Data analysis revealed that the Italian VSI had excellent psychometric properties, demonstrating high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.95) and construct validity. The scale proved sensitive in detecting significant differences in visceral sensitivity among groups, highlighting its utility as a clinical and research assessment tool. Specifically, the Italian VSI exhibited a unidimensional factorial structure and maintained a strong correlation with other measures of anxiety and the severity of gastrointestinal symptoms, confirming its role in enhancing the understanding and management of IBS and IBD in Italy.

Background: The importance of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during out-of-hospital cardiac arrests is especially important in the context of coronavirus disease 2029 (COVID-19) because it can significantly influence survival outcomes. The objective of this meta-analysis was to examine the primary outcomes of bystander CPR during the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. Methods: A search was conducted in the PubMed Central, Scopus, and EMBASE databases, as well as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database, up to December 10, 2023. In cases where the value of I² was greater than or equal to 50% or the Q-test indicated that the p-value was less than or equal to 0.05, the studies were considered to be heterogeneous. Sensitivity assessment was performed using the leave-one-out methodology. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO with the ID number CRD42023494912. Results: Twenty-five articles were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that bystander CPR frequency during the COVID-19 pandemic was 38.8%, compared to 44.8% for the pre-pandemic period (odds ratio: 1.04; 95% confidence interval: 0.93–1.16; p = 0.48). Conclusions: The article’s conclusions indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic influenced a reduction in bystander CPR compared to the pre-pandemic period, but this difference was not statistically significant. Further research is recommended to understand attitudes, including the fears of witnesses, before performing CPR on patients with suspected or confirmed infectious diseases. The study highlights the importance of bystander intervention in emergency situations and the impact of a pandemic on public health response behaviors. Keywords: COVID-19 bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) pandemic impact meta-analysis public health

This study aims to explore the differences in the psychological impact of COVID-19 on physicians, specifically those who volunteered or were contractually obligated to provide care for COVID-19 patients. While previous research has predominantly focused on the physical health consequences and risk of exposure for healthcare workers, limited attention has been given to their work conditions. This sample comprised 300 physicians, with 68.0% of them men (mean age = 54.67 years; SD = 12.44; range: 23–73). Participants completed measurements including the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Coping Inventory in Stressful Situations (CISS), and Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (C.A.S.). Pearson’s correlations were conducted to examine the relationships between the variables of interest. This study employed multivariate models to test the differences between work conditions: (a) involvement in COVID-19 patient care, (b) volunteering for COVID-19 patient management, (c) contractual obligation to care for COVID-19 patients, and (d) COVID-19 contraction in the workplace. The results of the multivariate analysis revealed that direct exposure to COVID-19 patients and contractual obligation to care for them significantly predicted state anxiety and dysfunctional coping strategies [Wilks’ Lambda = 0.917 F = 3.254 p < 0.001]. In contrast, volunteering or being affected by COVID-19 did not emerge as significant predictors for anxiety or dysfunctional coping strategies. The findings emphasize the importance of addressing the psychological well-being of physicians involved in COVID-19 care and highlight the need for targeted interventions to support their mental and occupational health.

Not available Keywords: post-traumatic stress disorders PTSD burnout paramedics emergency medical staff COVID- 19 SARS-CoV-2 pandemic occupational health workplace program

Aim: Rapid detection is crucial in complementing vaccination to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Materials & methods: Nasopharyngeal swabs (n = 213) and oropharyngeal swabs (n = 98) were tested. with the antigen rapid test kit. Results: Overall sensitivity (97.96%), specificity (100.00%) and coincidence rate (98.71%) were high, which translated into a positive predictive value of 100.00% and a negative predictive value of 96.64%. Conclusion: Antigen rapid tests have a great potential for screening in different settings to deliver results with high sensitivity and specificity.