No abstract

Background: Resilience is defined as the capacity to cope successfully with change or adversity. The aims of our study were to investigate levels of resilience in Italian healthcare professionals (HCPs) during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to identify potential predictors of resilience. Methods: We performed a web-based survey of HCPs (n = 1009) working in Italian hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey contained a 14-item resilience scale (RS14) and questionnaires to evaluate depression and anxiety symptoms. Non-HCP individuals (n = 375) from the general population were used for comparison. Results: HCPs showed significantly lower resilience compared to the control group (p = 0.001). No significant differences were observed after stratification for geographical area, work setting, role, or suspected/confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. In a linear regression analysis, RS14 was inversely correlated with depression (R2 = 0.227, p < 0.001) and anxiety (R2 = 0.117, p < 0.001) and directly correlated with age (R2 = 0.012, p < 0.001) but not with body mass index (BMI, R2 = 0.002, p = 0.213). In male HCPs, higher depression score (odds ratio (OR) 1.147, p < 0.001) or BMI (OR 1.136, p = 0.011) significantly predicted having low resilience. In female HCPs, higher depression score (OR 1.111, p < 0.0001) and working in a COVID-19 free setting (OR 2.308, p = 0.002) significantly predicted having low resilience. HCPs satisfied with personal protective equipment had higher levels of resilience (p < 0.010). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that resilience was lower in Italian HCPs than in the general population after the first COVID-19 wave. Specific factors can be identified, and targeted interventions may have an important role to foster resilience of HCPs.

IntroductionObesity treatment guidelines suggest moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT), but the patient’s compliance to this indication remains low. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is a time sparing training mode whose metabolic effects are not clear. This study aimed to determine whether a 12-week HIIT was more effective than MICT for weight loss in obese adults.Methods44 obese subjects were randomised and trained with isoenergetic treadmill exercises for 12 weeks: MICT (60% of maximal oxygen peak, VO2peak) or HIIT (3–7 repetition of 3 min 100% of VO2peak interspersed by 1.5 min 50% of VO2peak). The primary outcome was a change in body weight; the secondary outcomes were changes in body composition, blood pressure, lipid profile, glycaemia, insulin and VO2peak.Results32 subjects (53% male, mean age: 38.5 years, mean body mass index: 35.5 kg/m2) completed the trial. MICT and HIIT showed comparable effect within groups in weight loss (−6.0 kg (−9.0 kg to −3.0 kg) vs −5.7 kg (−8.3 kg to −3.1 kg)), changes in fat mass (−2.9% (−4.4% to −1.4%) vs −3.6% (−5.9% to −1.2%)), fat free mass (−5.3% (−7.8% to −2.8%) vs −5.5% (−8.3% to −2.6%)), diastolic blood pressure (−5.5 mm Hg (−10.6 mm Hg to −0.3 mm Hg) vs −5.8 mm Hg (−11.3 mm Hg to −0.3 mm Hg)) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (−16.4 mg/dL (−30.8 mg/dL to −2.0 mg/dL) vs −14.7 mg/dL (−25.6 mg/dL to −3.8 mg/dL)). There was a significant change between groups in VO2peak (HIIT: +461.6 mL (329.3‒593.8 mL); MICT: +170.5 mL (86.7–254.4 mL); p<0001) and duration of sessions (HIIT: 35.0 min (31.7 ‒35.6 min); MICT: 46.5 min (40.2‒48.3 min); p<0.001). No significant changes in systolic blood pressure, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, glycaemia or plasma insulin were observed.ConclusionsIn healthy adults with obesity, HIIT compared with MICT induced similar weight loss and cardiovascular risk factors improvement but resulted in a larger increase in cardiorespiratory fitness over a shorter period.

Introduction The outbreak by SARS-CoV-2 has rapidly spread worldwide. The need for specific treatments to adequately stop the inflammatory response and its sequelae is day by day more urgent and many therapeutic strategies were performed since COVID-19 burst in the last months. Statins were thought to be effective against this novel coronavirus for their anti-inflammatory properties, even if the real effects on COVID patients are still partially unexplored. Methods We retrospectively evaluated 501 adult patients, consecutively admitted to the two COVID-hospitals of Ferrara’s territory, and divided them into two groups: ST = patients on statin therapy on admission and NST=patients not on statin therapy on admission. We searched for differences between groups in terms of anamnestic, clinical and laboratory data and then in terms of COVID-19 outcomes. Results We found significant differences between groups in terms of age, comorbidities, procalcitonin and CPK serum levels: ST patients were older, more comorbid, with lower procalcitonin and higher CPK serum levels. Male sex was, together with the Charlson Comorbidity Index, an independent predictor of needing intensification of care, while age only was a good predictor of in-hospital and 100-day mortality. Differences were also found in the survival functions between the two groups. Conclusions After a period of observation of 100 days, ST patients, despite their older age and their greater load of comorbidities, have similar survival functions to NST patients. If adjusted for age and CCI the survival functions of ST group are considerably more favourable than those of the second group. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40292-021-00452-y.

Aim. To review and compare the PON-1 arylesterase activity between coronary artery disease (CAD) and non-CAD patients. Methods. Data were obtained by searching MEDLINE and Scopus for all investigations published between January 1, 2000 and March 1, 2021 comparing PON-1 arylesterase activity between CAD and controls. Results. Twenty studies, based on 5417 patients, met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. A random effect model revealed that PON-1 arylesterase activity was significantly lower in the CAD group compared to controls ( SMD = – 0.587 , 95 % CI = − 0.776 to -0.339, p < 0.0001 , I 2 = 92.3 % ). In CAD patients, the PON-1 arylesterase activity was significantly higher among CAD patients without diabetes mellitus (DM) compared to those with diabetes (SMD: 0.235, 95% CI: 0.014 to 0.456, p = 0.03 , I 2 = 0 % ). Conclusions. PON-1 activity is significantly lower in CAD patients, and those without DM presented a significantly higher PON-1 arylesterase activity.