Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40589817›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

The Italian public health response during the pandemic emergency: from qualitative data to the "performance index" of care provided by Spoleto Hospital.

Silvia Caroselli, Martina Roselli, Aldo Germani, Marco Fabiani, Caterina Micolonghi, Vincenzo Visco, Salvatore Raffa, Rita Mancini, Simona Petrucci, Alexander Cardone and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Silvia Caroselli *Department of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Martina Roselli *San Matteo degli Infermi Hospital of Spoleto, Spoleto, Italy.
Aldo GermaniDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Marco FabianiDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Caterina MicolonghiDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Vincenzo ViscoDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Salvatore RaffaDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Rita ManciniDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Simona PetrucciDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Alexander CardoneSan Matteo degli Infermi Hospital of Spoleto, Spoleto, Italy.
Orietta RossiSan Matteo degli Infermi Hospital of Spoleto, Spoleto, Italy.
Giorgio BanchieriAssociazione Italiana per la Qualità della Assistenza Sanitaria e Sociale (ASIQUAS), Largo Konrad, Adenauer 1/B, Rome, Italy.
Christian NapoliSant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Maria PianeDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The public health emergency was one of the most severe consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, which occurred in successive waves since March 2020. In this scenario, the Hospital of Spoleto "San Matteo degli Infermi" (located in the Umbria region, Italy) became a COVID-19 referral center and therefore had to make organizational changes. This study aims to evaluate the quality of care provided during the pandemic and to explore what the hospital management should focus on. Methods: An online survey related to ten topics across the five pandemic waves that took place in Italy from March 2020 to February 2022, was administered to the hospital unit referents. The qualitative responses collected were analyzed quantitatively using a recognized tool, called "Streetlight PRIority Swot" (SPRIS) system and based on a new and multilevel "strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats" (SWOT) matrix. Results: It was highlighted that the demand for continuity of care for patients and an increase in personal protective equipment were the issues that should have been the focus of the intervention after the first wave. Taking this into account, an improvement in performance was observed in the subsequent waves. Therefore, the results described a more than good quality of care provided among the hospital units, although with the need to improve the orthopedic services, emerged as the most critical area. Limitations reasons for caution: Due to practical limitations, the study population was limited to the hospital unit referents. Future broader surveys may enrich the information from the hospital experience. The SPRIS system uses a general-to-specific approach which can lead to a complex outcome assessment. However, careful and continuous application supports the analytical validity and utility of this method. Conclusion: The analysis based on the SPRIS system showed the effective response of Spoleto Hospital after the first sudden wave for the following four pandemic waves, driven by the implementation of safety measures. The perspective adopted and the scenario tested can be seen as a starting point for an educational tool to monitor and evaluate health management strategies during emergency periods.

Indexed as

COVID-19HospitalsPublic HealthQuality of Health CareHumansItalyPandemicsPersonal Protective EquipmentQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesCOVID-19healthcare managementperformance indexpriority scoreStreetlight PRIority Swot system (SPRIS)SWOT analysis

Identifiers

PMID40589817
PMCPMC12206721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.