Recently, numerous cases of monkeypox were reported from several non-endemic countries in Europe, North America, and Oceania, suggesting an unusual and alarming public health issue, particularly considering that the disease is not directly related to human or animal travels. Attention is currently being drawn to this phenomenon since more than 70% of the global population is no longer vaccinated against smallpox. Indeed, the smallpox vaccination also confers some indirect degree of protection against other poxviruses, including monkeypox. We performed a narrative review to describe the existing literature with regard to monkeypox using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases. This review aims to provide updated evidence of findings on the epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, management, and prevention of monkeypox, also considering the concurrent zoonotic pandemic caused by the COVID-19 coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2.

Introduction: Although the understanding of several aspects of long COVID-19 syndrome is increasing, there is limited literature regarding the treatment of these signs and symptoms. The aim of our systematic review was to understand which therapies have proved effective against the symptoms of long COVID-19. Methods: A systematic search for randomized controlled or clinical trials in several databases was conducted through 15 May 2022. Specific inclusion criteria included: (1) intervention studies, either randomized controlled (RCTs) or clinical trials; (2) diagnosis of long COVID-19, according to the World Health Organization criteria; (3) presence of long COVID-19 for at least 12 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: We initially found 1638 articles to screen. After removing 1602 works based on their title/abstract, we considered 35 full texts, and among them, two intervention studies were finally included. The first RCT focused on the greater improvement of treatment combining olfactory rehabilitation with oral supplementation with Palmitoylethanolamide and Luteolin in patients with olfactory dysfunction after COVID-19. The second study evaluated the positive impact of aromatherapy vs. standard care in adult females affected by fatigue. Conclusion: Our systematic review found only two intervention studies focused on patients affected by long COVID-19. More intervention studies are needed to investigate potentially positive interventions for long COVID-19 symptoms.

Generally, seafarers face a higher risk of illnesses and accidents than land workers. In most cases, there are no medical professionals on board seagoing vessels, which makes disease diagnosis even more difficult. When this occurs, onshore doctors may be able to provide medical advice through telemedicine by receiving better symptomatic and clinical details in the health abstracts of seafarers. The adoption of text mining techniques can assist in extracting diagnostic information from clinical texts. We applied lexicon sentimental analysis to explore the automatic labeling of positive and negative healthcare terms to seafarers’ text healthcare documents. This was due to the lack of experimental evaluations using computational techniques. In order to classify diseases and their associated symptoms, the LASSO regression algorithm is applied to analyze these text documents. A visualization of symptomatic data frequency for each disease can be achieved by analyzing TF-IDF values. The proposed approach allows for the classification of text documents with 93.8% accuracy by using a machine learning model called LASSO regression. It is possible to classify text documents effectively with tidy text mining libraries. In addition to delivering health assistance, this method can be used to classify diseases and establish health observatories. Knowledge developed in the present work will be applied to establish an Epidemiological Observatory of Seafarers’ Pathologies and Injuries. This Observatory will be a collaborative initiative of the Italian Ministry of Health, University of Camerino, and International Radio Medical Centre (C.I.R.M.), the Italian TMAS.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected national healthcare systems worldwide, with around 282 million cumulative confirmed cases reported in over 220 countries and territories as of the end of 2021. The Italian National Health System was heavily affected, with detrimental impacts on preventive service delivery. Routine vaccination services were disrupted across the country during the first months of the pandemic, and both access to and demand for vaccines have decreased during the pandemic. In many cases, parents preferred to postpone scheduled appointments for routine paediatric vaccinations because of stay-at-home orders or fear of COVID-19 infection when accessing care. The objective of the current study was to assess the routine childhood vaccine coverage (VC) rates during the COVID-19 epidemic in Italy. We compared 2020 and 2019 VC by age group and vaccine type. The Italian Ministry of Health collected anonymised and aggregated immunisation national data through the local health authorities (LHAs). Results were considered statistically significant at a two-tailed p-value ≤ 0.05. VC rates for mandatory vaccinations decreased in 2020 compared to 2019 (range of VC rate decrease: −1% to −2.7%), while chicken pox increased (+2.2%) in 7-year-old children. Recommended vaccinations were moderately affected (range of VC rate decrease in 2020 vs. 2019: −1.4% to −8.5%), with the exception of anti-HPV in males, Men ACWY, and anti-rotavirus vaccination (VC increase 2020 vs. 2019: +1.8%, +4.7% and +9.4%, respectively). In the COVID-19 era, the implementation of coherent, transparent, and effective communication campaigns and educational programs on safe childhood vaccinations, together with the increase in the number of healthcare staff employed, is essential to support strategies to reinforce vaccination confidence and behaviour, thus avoiding health threats due to VPD during and beyond COVID-19 times.

Objectives: The incidence of acute cardiac events is one of the main reasons for medical consultation, disembarkation, repatriation, and death among seafarers at sea. Managing cardiovascular risk factors, particularly those that can be modified, is the key to preventing cardiovascular disease. Therefore, this review estimates the pooled prevalence of major CVD risk factors among seafarers. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of studies published between 1994 and December 2021 in four international databases, namely PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science (WOS). Each study was evaluated for methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool for prevalence studies. The DerSimonian–Laird random-effects model with logit transformations was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of major CVD risk factors. The results were reported in accordance with the Preferred Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Out of all 1484 studies reviewed, 21 studies with 145,913 study participants met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. In the pooled analysis, the prevalence of smoking was found to be 40.14% (95% CI: 34.29 to 46.29%) with heterogeneity between studies (I² = 98%, p < 0.01). The prevalence of hypertension, overweight, obesity, diabetes mellitus, and alcohol consumption was 45.32%, 41.67%, 18.60%, 12.70%, and 38.58%, respectively. However, the sensitivity analysis after excluding studies showed a pooled prevalence of hypertension, overweight, obesity, and diabetes mellitus of 44.86%, 41.87%, 15.99%, and 16.84%, respectively. The subgroup analysis demonstrated that smoking prevalence among seafarers had decreased significantly after 2013. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that CVD risk factors, particularly hypertension, overweight, smoking, alcohol consumption, and obesity, are prevalent among seafarers. These findings may serve as a guide for shipping companies and other responsible bodies in order to prevent CVD risk factors among seafarers. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022300993.

Previous studies ruled out the benefits of azithromycin for treatment of patients with COVID-19 who are hospitalized. However, the effects of azithromycin for treatment of patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results in the community remains a matter of debate. This study aimed to assess whether azithromycin, when used in subjects with positive test results for SARS-CoV-2, is associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization, in-hospital COVID-19 outcomes, and death. Two study cohorts were selected. Cohort A included subjects with positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 between February 20, 2020 and December 10, 2020; cohort B included subjects infected with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalized between February 20, 2020 and December 31, 2020. We compared the risk of hospitalization, intensive care unit access, need for mechanical ventilation, and death in azithromycin users versus nonusers. A clustered Fine-Gray analysis was employed to assess the risk of hospitalization; logistic and Cox regressions were performed to assess the risk of intensive care unit access, mechanical ventilation, and death. In cohort A, among 4861 azithromycin users and 4861 propensity-matched nonusers, azithromycin use was associated with higher risk of hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-1.75) compared with nonuse. In cohort B, among 997 subjects selected in both groups, azithromycin use was not significantly associated with intensive care unit access (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% CI 0.93-1.56), mechanical ventilation (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.99-1.70), 14-day mortality (HR0.88, 95% CI 0.74-1.05), or 30-day mortality (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77-1.03). Our findings confirm the lack of benefits of azithromycin treatment among community patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, raising concern on potential risks associated with its inappropriate use.