We aimed to assess the attitude towards influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccinations among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recovered patients. We performed a cross-sectional study consisting of a standardized telephone interview carried out between September and November 2020 targeting a cohort of adult in- and out-patients that had recovered from COVID-19 after the first wave (March–May 2020) at Udine Hospital (Italy). Overall, 599 people participated (320 female, median age 53 years) and most had experienced an acute COVID-19 with mild illness (409, 68.3%). The majority were hesitant or undecided towards influenza (327, 54.6%) and SARS-CoV-2 (353, 59.2%) vaccines. Older age, public work exposure, and previous 2019 flu shots were the main factors associated with a positive attitude toward both vaccinations (p < 0.05). Being hospitalized during the acute COVID-19 phase was associated with the willingness to get a flu shot (94/272, 34.5%) but not SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (70/244, 28.7%). Vaccine hesitancy is diffuse and multifactorial also among COVID-19 recovered.

The number of community-dwelling people with dementia (PwD) is rising, and the role of their relatives is crucial in addressing and mitigating the implications of dementia on health care systems and on society. We developed a new conceptual framework to promote the collaboration of the community in supporting relatives who are caring for a PwD as well as a range of stakeholders in embracing dementia. A qualitatively driven, multi-method study divided into three phases was performed from 2019 to 2021. A qualitative descriptive study, a mixed-method systematic review and three consensus workshops were conducted, and their results were triangulated. The final version of the Community Collaboration Concept Framework is composed of three main domains based upon seven components: (1) embracing dementia; (2) creating empowerment and a sense of community; (3) collaborating through cocreation and design thinking. The new framework is based on the literature, the synthesis of empirical data and the consensus of a panel of international experts, supporting the global goal of improving community inclusiveness and collaboration. Further studies are needed to confirm its validity, how it should be implemented in practice in various settings and to propose improvements when designing projects based upon it.

The COVID-19 pandemic emotionally affected the lives of patients cared for in different settings. However, a comprehensive view of the whole experience as lived by survived patients, from the onset of the disease and over time, is substantially unknown to date. A descriptive qualitative design was implemented according to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. Adult patients (=1067) cared for during the first wave (March/April 2020) capable of answering an interview and willing to participate were interviewed (=397) by phone with an interview guide including open- and closed-ended questions. In this context, they were asked to summarise with a metaphor their entire COVID-19 experience at six months. Then, the emotional orientation (positive, neutral, or negative) of the metaphors expressed was identified. The participants were mainly female (206; 51.9%), with an average age of 52.6 years (CI 95% 50.4–53.6), reporting a mild severity of COVID-19 disease at the onset (261; 65.7%) and the perception of being completely healed (294; 70%) at six months. The patients summarised their experiences mainly using negative-oriented (248; 62.5%) metaphors; only 54 (13.6%) reported positive-oriented metaphors and a quarter (95; 23.95) neutral-oriented metaphors. Nearly all positive-oriented metaphors were reported by patients with symptoms at the onset (53; 98.1%), a significantly higher proportion compared to those reporting negative- (219; 88.3%) and neutral–oriented (78; 82.1%) metaphors (p = 0.014). While no other clinical features of the disease were associated, among females, significantly more negative-oriented metaphors emerged. Moreover, neutral-oriented metaphors were reported by younger patients (49.5 years, CI 95% 64.11–52.92) as compared to those negative and positive that were reported by more mature patients (53.9; CI 95% 52.04–55.93 and 54.8; CI 95% 50.53–59.24, respectively) (p = 0.044). Nurses and healthcare services require data to predict the long-term needs of patients. Our findings suggest that, for many patients, the COVID-19 lived experience was negative over time.

Accumulating evidence indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic carries risks to psychological health and represents a collective traumatic experience with consequences at the social, economic, and health levels. The primary aim of this study was to collect ongoing COVID-19 survivors’ pandemic-related experiences as expressed through the use of metaphors; the secondary aim was to explore socio-demographic variables associated with the metaphor orientation as negative, positive or neutral. An observational follow-up survey was conducted and reported according to the STROBE guidelines. Patients ≥ 18 years, who were treated for COVID-19 during the first wave (March/April 2020) and who were willing to participate in a telephone interview were involved and asked to summarize their COVID-19 experience as lived up to 6 and 12 months in a metaphor. A total of 339 patients participated in the first (6 months) and second (12 months) data collection. Patients were mainly female (51.9%), with an average age of 52.9 years (confidence interval, CI 95% 51.2–54.6). At 6 months, most participants (214; 63.1%) used a negative-oriented metaphor, further increasing at 12 months (266; 78.5%), when they used fewer neutral-/positive-oriented metaphors (p < 0.001). At the 6-month follow-up, only three individual variables (female gender, education, and experiencing symptoms at the COVID-19 onset) were significantly different across the possible metaphor orientation; at 12 months, no individual variables were significantly associated. This study suggests increasingly negative lived experiences over time and the need for personalized healthcare pathways to face the long-term traumatic consequences of COVID-19.