Healthcare organisations are social systems in which human resources are the most important factor. Leadership plays a key role, affecting outcomes for professionals, patients and work environment. The aim of this research was to identify and analyse the knowledge present to date concerning the correlation between leadership styles and nurses’ job satisfaction. A systematic review was carried out on PubMed, CINAHL and Embase using the following inclusion criteria: impact of different leadership styles on nurses’ job satisfaction; secondary care; nursing setting; full-text available; English or Italian language. From 11,813 initial titles, 12 studies were selected. Of these, 88% showed a significant correlation between leadership style and nurses’ job satisfaction. Transformational style had the highest number of positive correlations followed by authentic, resonant and servant styles. Passive-avoidant and laissez-faire styles, instead, showed a negative correlation with job satisfaction in all cases. Only the transactional style showed both positive and negative correlation. In this challenging environment, leaders need to promote technical and professional competencies, but also act to improve staff satisfaction and morale. It is necessary to identify and fill the gaps in leadership knowledge as a future objective to positively affect health professionals’ job satisfaction and therefore healthcare quality indicators.

Objective: To assess the impact of electronic health record (EHR) on healthcare quality, we hence carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies on this topic. Methods: PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify studies that investigated the association between the EHR implementation and process or outcome indicators. Two reviewers screened identified citations and extracted data according to the PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model for each indicator. Heterogeneity was quantified using the Cochran Q test and I2 statistics, and publication bias was assessed using the Egger’s test. Results: Of the 23 398 citations identified, 47 articles were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis showed an association between EHR use and a reduced documentation time with a difference in mean of −22.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) = −38.8 to −6.0%; P < 0.007]. EHR resulted also associated with a higher guideline adherence with a risk ratio (RR) of 1.33 (95% CI = 1.01 to 1.76; P = 0.049) and a lower number of medication errors with an overall RR of 0.46 (95% CI = 0.38 to 0.55; P < 0.001), and adverse drug effects (ADEs) with an overall RR of 0.66 (95% CI = 0.44 to 0.99; P = 0.045). No association with mortality was evident ( P = 0.936). High heterogeneity among the studies was evident. Publication bias was not evident. Conclusions: EHR system, when properly implemented, can improve the quality of healthcare, increasing time efficiency and guideline adherence and reducing medication errors and ADEs. Strategies for EHR implementation should be therefore recommended and promoted.

Background: Tumor Boards (TBs) are Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) meetings in which different specialists work together closely sharing clinical decisions in cancer care. The composition is variable, depending on the type of tumor discussed. As an organizational tool, MDTs are thought to optimize patient outcomes and to improve care performance. The aim of the study was to perform an umbrella review summarizing the available evidence on the impact of TBs on healthcare outcomes and processes. Methods: Pubmed and Web of Science databases were investigated along with a search through citations. The only study design included was systematic review. Only reviews published after 1997 concerning TBs and performed in hospital settings were considered. Two researchers synthetized the studies and assessed their quality through the AMSTAR2 tool. Results: Five systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2017 were retrieved. One review was focused on gastrointestinal cancers and included 16 studies; another one was centered on lung cancer and included 16 studies; the remaining three studies considered a wide range of tumors and included 27, 37 and 51 studies each. The main characteristics about format and members and the definition of TBs were collected. The decisions taken during TBs led to changes in diagnosis (probability to receive a more accurate assessment and staging), treatment (usually more appropriate) and survival (not unanimous improvement shown). Other outcomes less highlighted were quality of life, satisfaction and waiting times. Conclusions: The study showed that the multidisciplinary approach is the best way to deliver the complex care needed by cancer patients; however, it is a challenge that requires organizational and cultural changes and must be led by competent health managers who can improve teamwork within their organizations. Further studies are needed to reinforce existing literature concerning health outcomes. Evidence on the impact of TBs on clinical practices is still lacking for many aspects of cancer care. Further studies should aim to evaluate the impact on survival rates, quality of life and patient satisfaction. Regular studies should be carried out and new process indicators should be defined to assess the impact and the performance of TBs more consistently.

To assess both qualitatively and quantitatively the impact of Public Reporting (PR) on clinical outcomes, we carried out a systematic review of published studies on this topic. Pubmed, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases were searched to identify studies published from 1991 to 2014 that investigated the relationship between PR and clinical outcomes. Studies were considered eligible if they investigated the relationship between PR and clinical outcomes and comprehensively described the PR mechanism and the study design adopted. Among the clinical outcomes identified, meta-analysis was performed for overall mortality rate which quantitative data were exhaustively reported in a sufficient number of studies. Two reviewers conducted all data extraction independently and disagreements were resolved through discussion. The same reviewers evaluated also the quality of the studies using a GRADE approach. Twenty-seven studies were included. Mainly, the effect of PR on clinical outcomes was positive. Meta-analysis regarding overall mortality included, in a context of high heterogeneity, 10 studies with a total of 1,840,401 experimental events and 3,670,446 control events and resulted in a RR of 0.85 (95 % CI, 0.79-0.92). The introduction of PR programs at different levels of the healthcare sector is a challenging but rewarding public health strategy. Existing research covering different clinical outcomes supports the idea that PR could, in fact, stimulate providers to improve healthcare quality.

The WHO declared the novel coronavirus disease a pandemic, with severe consequences for health and global economic activity and Italy is one of the hardest hit countries. This study aims to assess the socio-economic burden of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy through the estimation of Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) and productivity loss. The observational study was based on data from official governmental sources collected since the inception of epidemic until 28 April 2020. DALYs for a disease combines the years of life lost due to premature mortality in the population and the years lost due to disability of the disease. In addition to DALYs, temporary productivity loss due to absenteeism from work and permanent productivity loss due to premature mortality were estimated using the Human Capital Approach. The total DALYs amount to 2.01 per 1000 persons. The total permanent productivity loss was around EUR 300 million while the temporary productivity loss was around EUR 100 million. This evaluation does not consider other economic aspects related to lockdown, quarantine of contacts, healthcare direct costs etc. The burden of disease methodology is functional metric for steering choices of health policy and allowing the government to be accountable for the utilization of resources.