Governments and clinicians that were fully involved in the dramatic SARS-CoV-2 outbreak during the last few weeks in Italy (and more or less all over the world) are fiercely debating the use of methods for screening this viral infection. Thus, all countries are employing a lot of resources in order to test more and more subjects. For this purpose, there are different strategies, based on either direct or indirect tests. Among the first category, the main assays used for SARS-CoV-2 are based on a real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Such tests can be performed on nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for the categories of those with symptoms and those potentially exposed. In order to integrate the molecular assays in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, a wide range of serology immunoassays (IAs) have also been developed. If we want to identify "immune" people in order to let them to come back to work, serology is the best (and probably the only) approach.On March the 16, 2020, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO General Director, concluding his speech about SARS-Cov-2 to the United Nations Assembly pronounced the famous sentence: "test, test, test".Governments and clinicians that where fully involved in the dramatic SARS-CoV-2 outbreak during the last few weeks in Italy, (and more or less all over the world) are fiercely debating the use of methods for screening this viral infection. Thus, all countries are employing a lot of resources in order to test more and more subjects. For this purpose, there are different possible strategies, based on either direct or indirect tests: Direct TestsThe main assays used for SARS-CoV-2 are based on a real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) that needs a few hours to give an answer. Most molecular tests have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under emergency use authorization (EUA) and are Conformité Européenne (CE) marked [1,2].Such tests can be performed on nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs in symptomatic people (fever, dry cough, asthenia). Another strategy is to test all health care workers and individuals in the potentially exposed category (policemen, military); nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs could also be used for those in close contact with SARS-CoV-2-positive people or for people who live in close and crowded settings (e.g., nursing homes). Theoretically, nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs Int.

Studies have shown that the pandemic has led to an increase in sick leave periods among healthcare workers (HCWs); however, this might have changed over time considering increase in vaccination coverage and change in COVID-19 variant predominance. Therefore, we conducted an observational study to evaluate whether the type of symptoms and the duration of sick leave period for healthcare workers working in a large university hospital in the South of Italy changed between January 2021 and January 2022; 398 cases of COVID-19 were identified for a total of 382 subjects involved. A total of 191 subjects answered the questionnaire about symptoms; of these, 79 had COVID-19 during the period from March 2020 until February 2022. The results showed a decrease of about 1.2 days in sick leave period for each quarter without finding significant differences in the perception of symptoms. It is possible to hypothesize a contribution from the Omicron variant to the decrease in sick leave period in the last quarter, from vaccination coverage, from optimization of COVID-19 management, and from change in the regulations for the assessment of positivity.

Background: Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are a group of heterogeneous diseases characterized by inflammation and/or fibrosis of the lung interstitium, leading to a wide range of clinical manifestations and outcomes. Over the years, the literature has demonstrated the increased diagnostic accuracy and confidence associated with a multidisciplinary approach (MDA) in assessing diseases involving lung parenchyma. This approach was recently emphasized by the latest guidelines from the American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Association for the diagnosis of ILDs. Methods: In this review, we will discuss the role, composition, and timing of multidisciplinary diagnosis (MDD) concerning idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, connective tissue disease associated with ILDs, hypersensitive pneumonia, and idiopathic pneumonia with autoimmune features, based on the latest recommendations for their diagnosis. Results: The integration of clinical, radiological, histopathological, and, often, serological data is crucial in the early identification and management of ILDs, improving patient outcomes. Based on the recent endorsement of transbronchial cryo-biopsy in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis guidelines, an MDA helps guide the choice of the sampling technique, obtaining the maximum diagnostic performance, and avoiding the execution of more invasive procedures such as a surgical lung biopsy. A multidisciplinary team should include pulmonologists, radiologists, pathologists, and, often, rheumatologists, being assembled regularly to achieve a consensus diagnosis and to review cases in light of new features. Conclusions: The literature highlighted that an MDA is essential to improve the accuracy and reliability of ILD diagnosis, allowing for the early optimization of therapy and reducing the need for invasive procedures. The multidisciplinary diagnosis of ILDs is an ongoing and dynamic process, often referred to as a “working diagnosis”, involving the progressive integration and re-evaluation of clinical, radiological, and histological features.

No abstract

During COVID-19 pandemic, a lot of diseases suffered from a limited access to health care services, owing to the use of resources, both technical and financial, mainly directed towards such a dramatic outbreak. Among these, tuberculosis (TB) has been one of the most penalized, with a huge delay both in diagnosis and in start of treatment, with a consequential dramatic increase in morbidity and mortality. COVID-19 and tuberculosis share similar common pathogenetic pathways, and both diseases affect primarily the lungs.About the impact of TB on COVID-19 severity and mortality, data are unclear and literature reports are often conflicting. Certainly, considering the management of coinfected patients, there are pharmacokinetic interactions between several drugs used for the therapy of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the treatment of TB.