Immunization of health care workers (HCWs) against influenza has been associated with improvements in patient safety. The aim of this study is to assess the beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge of HCWs and health profession students regarding influenza. An anonymous questionnaire was distributed to HCWs in three local Florentine healthcare units, at Careggi University Teaching Hospital, and to students in health profession degree programs. A total of 2576 questionnaires were fully completed. A total of 12.3% of subjects responded that they were “always vaccinated” in all three of the seasonal vaccination campaigns studied (2007–2008 to 2009–2010), 13.1% had been vaccinated once or twice, and 74.6% had not received vaccinations. Although the enrolled subjects tended to respond that they were “never vaccinated,” they considered influenza to be a serious illness and believed that the influenza vaccine is effective. The subjects who refused vaccination more frequently believed that the vaccine could cause influenza and that it could have serious side effects. More than 60% of the “always vaccinated” group completely agreed that HCWs should be vaccinated. Self-protection and protecting family members or other people close to the respondent from being infected and representing potential sources of influenza infection can be considered motivating factors for vaccination. The results highlight the importance of improving vaccination rates among all HCWs through multi-component interventions. Knowledge of influenza should be reinforced.

Attitudes toward immunization observed in this study are generally positive for preventing some infectious diseases (i.e., measles and rubella), but relatively poor for others (i.e., varicella). More information should be made available to HCWs on the benefits of vaccination and efforts to encourage vaccination uptake should be performed. Educational program on the risk of being infected working in a hospital should be implemented in order to increase the risk perception toward infectious diseases among HCWs.

SARS-CoV2-induced direct cytopathic effects against type II pneumocytes are suspected to play a role in mediating and perpetuating lung damage. The aim of this study was to evaluate serum KL-6 behavior in COVID-19 patients to investigate its potential role in predicting clinical course. Sixty patients (median age IQR, 65 (52–69), 43 males), hospitalized for COVID-19 at Siena COVID Unit University Hospital, were prospectively enrolled. Twenty-six patients were selected (median age IQR, 63 (55–71), 16 males); all of them underwent follow-up evaluations, including clinical, radiological, functional, and serum KL-6 assessments, after 6 (t1) and 9 (t2) months from hospital discharge. At t0, KL-6 concentrations were significantly higher than those at t1 (760 (311–1218) vs. 309 (210–408) p = 0.0208) and t2 (760 (311–1218) vs 324 (279–458), p = 0.0365). At t0, KL-6 concentrations were increased in patients with fibrotic lung alterations than in non-fibrotic group (755 (370–1023) vs. 305 (225–608), p = 0.0225). Area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) analysis showed that basal KL-6 levels showed good accuracy in discriminating patients with fibrotic sequelae radiologically documented (AUC 85%, p = 0.0404). KL-6 concentrations in patients with fibrotic involvement were significantly reduced at t1 (755 (370–1023) vs. 290 (197–521), p = 0.0366) and t2 (755 (370–1023) vs. 318 (173–435), p = 0.0490). Serum concentrations of KL-6 in hospitalized COVID-19 patients may contribute to identify severe patients requiring mechanical ventilation and to predict those who will develop pulmonary fibrotic sequelae in the follow-up.

Pneumococcal infection is a public health concern that disproportionately affects the young, the elderly, and the immunocompromised. There is an open debate on the implementation of polysaccharide and/or conjugate vaccines for pneumococcal diseases in adults and the elderly in many countries. The aim of this paper is to systematically review the economic profile of pneumococcal vaccines in adults in terms of costs and benefits. Areas covered: The search for economic studies on pneumococcal vaccination was carried out in Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and the HTA and NHS EED databases and through a manual search in journals dealing with economic evaluations. We included original articles and reviews with economic evaluation of polysaccharide 23-valent (PPV23) and/or conjugate pneumococcal vaccine 13-valent (PCV13) use in adults, the elderly, and at-risk groups to provide a systematic review of economical evaluation. Expert commentary: Pneumococcal vaccination is strongly recommended for all adults, especially subjects at risk and the elderly. Pneumococcal vaccination with PCV13 or PPV23 in adults is good value for money and should be a priority for the decision-makers. The main issue is how vaccination could be offered.