Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a massive impact on health care systems, increasing the risks of psychological distress in health professionals. This study aims at assessing the prevalence of burnout and psychopathological conditions in health professionals working in a health institution in the Northern Italy, and to identify socio-demographic, work-related and psychological predictors of burnout. Methods: Health professionals working in the hospitals of the Istituto Auxologico Italiano were asked to participate to an online anonymous survey investigating socio-demographic data, COVID-19 emergency-related work and psychological factors, state anxiety, psychological distress, post-traumatic symptoms and burnout. Predictors of the three components of burnout were assessed using elastic net regression models. Results: Three hundred and thirty health professionals participated to the online survey. Two hundred and thirty-five health professionals (71.2%) had scores of state anxiety above the clinical cutoff, 88 (26.8%) had clinical levels of depression, 103 (31.3%) of anxiety, 113 (34.3%) of stress, 121 (36.7%) of post-traumatic stress. Regarding burnout, 107 (35.7%) had moderate and 105 (31.9%) severe levels of emotional exhaustion; 46 (14.0%) had moderate and 40 (12.1%) severe levels of depersonalization; 132 (40.1%) had moderate and 113 (34.3%) severe levels of reduced personal accomplishment. Predictors of all the three components of burnout were work hours, psychological comorbidities, fear of infection and perceived support by friends. Predictors of both emotional exhaustion and depersonalization were female gender, being a nurse, working in the hospital, being in contact with COVID-19 patients. Reduced personal accomplishment was also predicted by age. Conclusions: Health professionals had high levels of burnout and psychological symptoms during the COVID-19 emergency. Monitoring and timely treatment of these conditions is needed.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the role of Tocilizumab therapy (TCZ) in terms of ICU admission and mortality rate of critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Design: Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were prospectively enrolled in SMAtteo COvid19 REgistry (SMACORE). A retrospective analysis of patients treated with TCZ matched using propensity score to patients treated with Standard Of Care (SOC) was conducted. Setting: The study was conducted at IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Hospital, Pavia, Italy, from March 14, 2020 to March 27, 2020. Participants: Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 hospitalized in our institution at the time of TCZ availability. Interventions: TCZ was administered to 21 patients. The first administration was 8 mg/kg (up to a maximum 800 mg per dose) of Tocilizumab intravenously, repeated after 12 h if no side effects were reported after the first dose. Main Outcomes and Measures: ICU admission and 7-day mortality rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical and laboratory data. Results: There were 112 patients evaluated (82 were male and 30 were female, with a median age of 63.55 years). Using propensity scores, the 21 patients who received TCZ were matched to 21 patients who received SOC (a combination of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and prophylactic dose of low weight heparin). No adverse event was detected following TCZ administration. This study found that treatment with TCZ did not significantly affect ICU admission (OR 0.11; 95% CI between 0.00 and 3.38; p = 0.22) or 7-day mortality rate (OR 0.78; 95% CI between 0.06 and 9.34; p = 0.84) when compared with SOC. Analysis of laboratory measures showed significant interactions between time and treatment regarding C-Reactive Protein (CRP), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), platelets and international normalized ratio (INR) levels. Variation in lymphocytes count was observed over time, irrespective of treatment. Conclusions: TCZ administration did not reduce ICU admission or mortality rate in a cohort of 21 patients. Additional data are needed to understand the effect(s) of TCZ in treating patients diagnosed with COVID-19.

Knowledge about psychological and psychosocial predictors of chronic postsurgical pain is important to identify patients at risk for poor outcomes. The objective of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to assess the effect of such predictors. A comprehensive search of the available literature on this topic was performed using the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and PsycInfo. Estimates of the effect of each predictor were extracted, and both a narrative synthesis and a quantitative synthesis of these estimates were performed. Multiple imputation was used to take into account the effect of nonsignificant estimates in case they were not reported by original studies. From a sample of 8322 records, 83 articles were included in the narrative synthesis and 41 studies were used to perform the meta-analyses. The narrative synthesis showed that evidence about the effect of psychological predictors is heterogeneous, with few expected predictors, such as optimism, state anxiety and psychological distress, consistently associated with chronic postsurgical pain. By contrast, the meta-analyses showed that state anxiety, trait anxiety, mental health, depression, catastrophizing and, to a lesser extent, kinesiophobia and self-efficacy have a weak but significant association with chronic postsurgical pain. In conclusion, this study showed that psychological predictors have a significant association with chronic postsurgical pain and that state anxiety is the most explicative one.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the role of sleep disturbances and sleep disorders in influencing presence and intensity of chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP). We included cohort studies which enrolled adults, assessed sleep disturbances or disorders before surgery, measured pain intensity, presence of pain, or opioid use at least three months after surgery. Eighteen studies were included in a narrative synthesis and 12 in a meta-analysis. Sleep disturbances and disorders were significantly related to CPSP, with a small effect size, r = 0.13 (95% CI 0.06-0.20). The certainty of evidence was rated low due to risk of bias and heterogeneity. In subgroup analyses the above association was significant in studies that used pain intensity as the outcome, but not in those that used presence of pain; in studies on patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty or other surgeries, but not in those on patients who had breast cancer surgery or total hip arthroplasty; in the single study that assessed insomnia and in studies that assessed sleep disturbances as predictors. A meta-regression showed that the follow-up length was positively associated with the overall estimate. Our findings suggest that presurgical sleep disturbances and disorders should be evaluated to detect patients at risk for CPSP. Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=272654.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers and informal caregivers were at an increased risk of adverse mental health effects. This systematic review provides a summary of the available evidence on the content and efficacy of the psychological support interventions in increasing mental health among healthcare providers and informal caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: PubMed, Google Scholar, PsychINFO, and Scopus databases were systematically searched for relevant articles, and the methodological quality of selected articles was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Results: A search of electronic databases identified five reports based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. All psychological support interventions for caregivers were delivered digitally. Despite the large heterogeneity of the selected studies, the findings support the efficacy of mental health interventions in reducing distress and burnout, while promoting self-efficacy and well-being in both healthcare providers and informal caregivers. Conclusion: Since mental health problems are expected to increase during, and as a result of, the COVID-19 pandemic, and digital tools might offer a range of mental health treatments to meet the unique and immediate needs of people, further research is needed to test the cost-effectiveness of digital psychological interventions.

Background It is increasingly recognized that treating pain is crucial for an effective care of the person in the setting of the neurological rehabilitation. The Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation was constituted with the purpose to identify the best practices that can be used in this context. Along with drug therapies and physical interventions, psychological treatments have been proven to be some of the most valuable tools that can be used within a multidisciplinary approach for fostering a reduction in pain intensity. However, there is the need to elucidate what forms of psychotherapy could be matched with the specific pathologies that are taken in charge by the neurorehabilitation teams. Objectives To extensively assess the available evidence which supports the use of psychological therapies for pain reduction in neurological diseases. Methods A systematic review of the studies evaluating the effect of psychotherapies on pain intensity in neurological disorders was performed through an electronic search using PUBMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Based on the level of evidence of the included studies, recommendations were outlined separately for the different conditions. Results The literature search yielded 2352 results and the final database included 400 articles. The overall strength of the recommendations was medium/low. The different forms of psychological interventions, including Cognitive – Behavioral Therapy, cognitive or behavioral techniques, Mindfulness, hypnosis, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Brief Interpersonal Therapy, virtual reality interventions, the different forms of biofeedback and mirror therapy were found to be effective for pain reduction in pathologies such as musculoskeletal pain, fibromyalgia, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, Central Post – Stroke pain, Phantom Limb Pain, pain secondary to Spinal Cord Injury, multiple sclerosis and other debilitating syndromes, diabetic neuropathy, Medically Unexplained Symptoms, migraine and headache. Conclusions Psychological interventions and psychotherapies are safe and effective treatments that can be used within an integrated approach in patients undergoing neurological rehabilitation for pain. The different interventions can be specifically selected depending on the disease being treated. A table of evidences and recommendations from the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation is also provided in the final part of the paper.