Since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak a pandemic on 11 March, severe lockdown measures have been adopted by the Italian Government. For over two months of stay-at-home orders, houses became the only place where people slept, ate, worked, practiced sports, and socialized. As consolidated evidence exists on housing as a determinant of health, it is of great interest to explore the impact that COVID-19 response-related lockdown measures have had on mental health and well-being. We conducted a large web-based survey on 8177 students from a university institute in Milan, Northern Italy, one of the regions most heavily hit by the pandemic in Europe. As emerged from our analysis, poor housing is associated with increased risk of depressive symptoms during lockdown. In particular, living in apartments <60 m² with poor views and scarce indoor quality is associated with, respectively, 1.31 (95% CI: 1046–1637), 1.368 (95% CI: 1166–1605), and 2.253 (95% CI: 1918–2647) times the risk of moderate–severe and severe depressive symptoms. Subjects reporting worsened working performance from home were over four times more likely to also report depression (OR = 4.28, 95% CI: 3713–4924). Housing design strategies should focus on larger and more livable living spaces facing green areas. We argue that a strengthened multi-interdisciplinary approach, involving urban planning, public mental health, environmental health, epidemiology, and sociology, is needed to investigate the effects of the built environment on mental health, so as to inform welfare and housing policies centered on population well-being.

The current review aimed to explore the association between urban greenspaces and health indicators. In particular, our aims were to analyze the association between publicly accessible urban greenspaces exposure and two selected health outcomes (objectively measured physical activity (PA) and mental health outcomes (MH)). Two electronic databases—PubMed/Medline and Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE)—were searched from 1 January 2000 to 30 September 2020. Only articles in English were considered. Out of 356 retrieved articles, a total of 34 papers were included in our review. Of those, 15 assessed the association between urban greenspace and PA and 19 dealt with MH. Almost all the included studies found a positive association between urban greenspace and both PA and MH, while a few demonstrated a non-effect or a negative effect on MH outcomes. However, only guaranteeing access is not enough. Indeed, important elements are maintenance, renovation, closeness to residential areas, planning of interactive activities, and perceived security aspects. Overall, despite some methodological limitations of the included studies, the results have shown almost univocally that urban greenspaces harbour potentially beneficial effects on physical and mental health and well-being.

The ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 is a strong reminder that the lockdown period has changed the way that people and communities live, work, and interact, and it's necessary to make resilient the built environment, both outdoor and mainly the indoor spaces: housing, workplaces, public buildings, and entertainment facilities. How can we re-design the concept of Well-being and Public Health in relation to the living places of the future? According to the previous statements and scenario, this paper aims to integrate the building hygiene and well-being, focusing the possible responses, both existing and for the new buildings, taking home a strong message from this "period" of physical distancing. The Well-being and Public Health recommendations for a healthy, safe, and sustainable housing are framed into the following key points: 1. Visible and accessible green elements and spaces; 2. Flexibility, adaptability, sharing, and crowding of living spaces, and compliant functions located into the buildings; 3. Re-appropriation of the basic principles and archetypes of sustainable architecture, thermal comfort and Indoor Air Quality (IAQ); 4. Water consumption and Wastewater Management; 5. Urban Solid Waste Management; 6. Housing automation and electromagnetic fields; 7. Indoor building and finishing materials. The Well-being and Public Health recommendations for a healthy, safe and sustainable housing may provide a useful basis for Designers, Policy Makers (fostering tax incentives for building renewal), Public Health experts and Local Health Agencies, in promoting actions and policies aimed to transform living places in healthier and Salutogenic spaces.

Starting from a previous experience carried out by the working group “Building and Environmental Hygiene” of the Italian Society of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine (SItI), the aim of the present work is to define new strategic goals for achieving a “Healthy and Salutogenic City”, which will be useful to designers, local governments and public bodies, policy makers, and all professionals working at local health agencies. Ten key points have been formulated: 1. climate change and management of adverse weather events; 2. land consumption, sprawl, and shrinking cities; 3. tactical urbanism and urban resilience; 4. urban comfort, safety, and security perception; 5. strengths and weaknesses of urban green areas and infrastructures; 6. urban solid waste management; 7. housing emergencies in relation to socio-economic and environmental changes; 8. energy aspects and environmental planning at an urban scale; 9. socio-assistance and welfare network at an urban scale: importance of a rational and widespread system; and 10. new forms of living, conscious of coparticipation models and aware of sharing quality objectives. Design strategies, actions, and policies, identified to improve public health and wellbeing, underline that the connection between morphological and functional features of urban context and public health is crucial for contemporary cities and modern societies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has upended the global healthcare systems. The surge in infections and sick critically ill patients has tested the resilience of healthcare infrastructures and facilities forcing organizations to quickly adapt and embrace emergency solutions. The paper proposes a decalogue of design strategies applicable both to new hospitals and to the refurbishment of existing hospitals. The authors conducted observations at hospitals, during public health webinars and through experts working groups from March to May 2020. In this commentary, the authors present a list of strategies for creating critical care surge capacity and exploring design strategies for healthcare design for resilient hospital facilities. The strategies are organized into two tiers: I) design and II) operations. The (I) Design phase strategies are: 1) Strategic Site Location; 2) Typology Configuration; 3) Flexibility; 4) Functional program; 5) User-centerdness. The (II) Operation phase strategies are: 6) Healthcare network on the territory; 7) Patient safety; 8) HVAC and indoor air quality; 9) Innovative finishing materials and furniture; 10) Healthcare digital innovation. Hospitals, health care systems, and institutions urgently need to assess their resources, identify potential bottlenecks, and create strategies for increasing critical care surge capacity. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare operations and accelerated the processes of innovation and transformation. The design and operational strategies can enable the achievement of resilient hospital facilities. Further multidisciplinary researches is needed to validate the strategies empirically.

The ongoing pandemic of COVID-19, which nowadays has exceeded 2.5 million notified infections in the world and about 200,000 deaths, is a strong reminder that urbanization has changed the way that people and communities live, work, and interact, and it's necessary to make resilient the systems and local capacities to prevent the spread of infectious diseases. How we can re-design the concept of Public Health in relation to the built environment and the contemporary cities? According to the previous statements and scenario, aim of this paper is to integrate the Urban Health strategic objectives, focusing the possible responses, both immediate and medium-long term, to the current environmental, social, and economic aspects of the "period" of physical distancing. Results. Immediate Actions are 01. program the flexibility of city schedules; 02. plan a smart and sustainable mobility network; 03. define a neighborhood services' plan; 04. develop a digitization of the urban context, promoting the smart communities; 05. re-think the accessibility to the places of culture and tourism. Medium-long term Actions are 06. design the indoor flexibility of domestic living spaces; 07. re-think building typologies, fostering the presence of semi-private or collective spaces; 08. renovate the basic care services' network; 09. integrate the existing environmental emergency plans, with those related to the health emergencies; 10. improve stakeholders' awareness of the factors affecting Public Health in the cities. The Decalogue of Public Health opportunities may provide a useful basis for Designers (Architects and Urban Planners), Policy Makers, Public Health experts and Local Health Agencies, in promoting actions and policies aimed to transform our cities in healthier and Salutogenic living environments. (www.actabiomedica.it).