Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are chronic conditions characterised by intestinal and systemic inflammation, often associated with significant psychological distress. Emerging evidence highlights a bidirectional relationship between inflammation and psychological factors, mediated by the gut-brain axis. Psychological distress may not only result from chronic inflammation but also contribute to symptom persistence and disease exacerbation. Despite this, clinical management of IBD primarily focuses on controlling inflammation, often overlooking psychological factors that may influence disease activity and treatment response.

GastroPsy protocol will last for 24 months and will follow a cross-sectional design. At least 150 participants will undergo a clinical evaluation based on the detection of biological, medical and psychological indicators and variables. The evaluation battery will comprise seven validated questionnaires. Through a k-means cluster analysis, the study aims to derive and describe data-driven clusters of IBD patients, finally exploring associations between identified clusters and external clinical variables (e.g. clinical activity).

Ethical Committee Approval was obtained from the CEtRA Abruzzo Region (IT) (Protocol ID 228/2025). The results of the present project will be published in peer-reviewed journals, disseminated electronically and in print, and presented as abstracts and/or personal communications during national and international conferences.

Leishmaniases are a group of vector-borne diseases caused by parasites of the genus Leishmania, which are renowned for increasing global spread due to factors like climate change, globalisation, urbanisation and migration. Leishmaniasis is classified as a neglected tropical disease but is endemic in several areas of the Mediterranean Basin, including Italy, where Leishmania infantum is most involved as the parasite, phlebotomine sand fly as the vector and dog as the principal reservoir. Effective surveillance of communicable infectious diseases is a goal worldwide for organisations such as the WHO and for local and national governments but is an unfulfilled objective. Even in Italy and particularly in the region of Tuscany, despite mandatory reporting, significant gaps each year are identified between reported cases and hospital admissions. By estimating the underreporting of confirmed human leishmaniasis cases, this protocol aims to suggest actions to strengthen the current epidemiological surveillance system to enable timely and effective public health intervention in human and veterinary populations.

This retrospective multicentre study, conducted in the Central Tuscany Health District, the most populous area of the Tuscany region with approximately 1.6 million inhabitants, is based on the analysis of data collected from 2014 to 2024 using diagnostic laboratory, hospital and regional information system sources. The primary objective is to estimate the degree of underreporting of leishmaniasis in this area through the application of capture-recapture models. The secondary objective is to analyse the clinical and demographic characteristics of individuals diagnosed as confirmed leishmaniasis cases between January 2014 and December 2024, as well as to perform a geolocation analysis of the cases. The study includes the entire population, both adult and paediatric, of the Central Tuscany Health District who underwent laboratory testing for leishmaniasis (serological tests identifying the presence of antibodies; parasitological examination with evidence of amastigotes in aspirates, smears or biopsy sections; culture examination of aspirates, biopsies and/or peripheral blood positive for the presence of promastigotes; identification of Leishmania nucleic acid in aspirates, biopsies and/or peripheral blood samples via molecular diagnosis).

The study is being conducted in accordance with the protocol approved by the Ethics Committee of the Tuscany Region – Pediatrics Section, in November 2024. Ethics Committee opinion register number: 219/2024. Because the study uses only pseudonymised, routinely collected administrative and laboratory data with no direct patient contact or intervention, individual informed consent was not required, as confirmed by the Ethics Committee. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, presented at international conferences and presented at stakeholder workshops.

Occiput posterior position is the most common fetal malposition, complicating up to 35% of initial labours, and its persistence can lead to increased risks of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. The role of maternal postures, such as lateral recumbent and hands-and-knees, in promoting the anterior rotation of the fetal head has been investigated in several randomised trials in the last two decades, with mostly negative results. However, both methodological and study design limitations may have contributed to such findings. Recently, the use of forward-leaning inversion and side-lying release procedures and of the Rebozo technique has been implemented into clinical practice as a non-invasive alternative to promote the anterior rotation of the fetal head. Yet, neither intervention has been rigorously assessed in a controlled study. Our aim is to conduct a randomised controlled trial to assess whether a combination of forward-leaning inversion and side-lying release procedures and the Rebozo technique in a pre-specified sequence during the first stage of labour of women with a posterior fetus would favour its anterior rotation.

The ReMaP-POPP (Rebozo and maternal procedures to prevent persistent occiput posterior position of the fetal head) trial will be an open-label single-centre randomised controlled trial with two parallel groups. Women will be eligible if they are ≥18 years old, in labour (3 to 8 cm) and with a singleton term fetus (≥37^0/7 weeks) in an occiput posterior position confirmed by transabdominal sonography. Eligible women will be randomised into two groups: (1) intervention, a sequence of forward-leaning inversion and side-lying release procedures and Rebozo technique (duration 90–105 min); and (2) control, standard of care (maternal postures, including upright, lateral recumbent and hands-and-knees). Blinding will be guaranteed only for the physician assessing the fetal head position by sonography. Randomisation will be performed using randomly permuted blocks of varying sizes (4, 6 and 8), stratified by parity, in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome will be the probability of occiput posterior position of the fetal head 3 hours and 30 min after randomisation, diagnosed by sonography. Secondary outcomes will include the probability of occiput posterior position at full cervical dilation and at birth, maternal and neonatal health-related outcomes, as well as maternal pain intensity and ability to cope with pain and birth satisfaction level. We will also assess safety outcomes regarding challenges in adequate fetal heart rate monitoring during the time interval between randomisation and primary outcome assessment. Sample size estimation considered the possibility to decrease the probability of occiput posterior position from 35.8% (control, based on prior retrospective data at our Institution) to 22% with the proposed intervention. With a power of 0.90 and a two-sided value of 0.05, the estimated sample size will be n=462 (n=231/arm). Considering a potential attrition rate of 20%, n=578 women will be needed. Enrolment will require approximately 16 months. Primary and secondary outcomes will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The effects of the intervention will be estimated by relative risks and their 95% CI.

The study has been approved by the Lombardy Ethics Committee n.3 (n. 5499, 20 December 2024). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Women will be free to decline participation or to withdraw at any time. Findings will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals in the field of midwifery and obstetrics. Also, they will be disseminated to the public through outreach activities involving families and healthcare specialists.

The study has been registered in the Clinical Trials database (NCT06887634).

Over the last decade, there has been a growing focus on the use of opioids in the management of pain across clinical practice and media outlets. The incidence of chronic non-cancer pain is estimated between 35% and 51%.1 It is estimated that around 22% of patients with chronic non-cancer pain received a prescription for an opioid, with 8%–12% showing signs of OUD.2...

Infectious diseases are a major global health concern, responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. To advance the understanding and treatment of these diseases, biobanks and biorepositories play a crucial role in guaranteeing sample traceability through their entire life cycle (collection, acquisition and registration, processing, storage, distribution) and future analysis of clinical and biological data.

The INfectious DIsease REgistry BIObank (INDI-REBIO) is an observational, prospective, monocentric, open-ended registry with ad hoc procedures and a systematic collection of uniform clinical, laboratory, imaging and therapeutic data of patients with suspected or microbiologically documented bacterial, viral, fungal and parasitic infectious diseases from the IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy). The study aims to collect both uniform data and biological samples such as blood and other relevant specimens. The registry aims to include significant patient numbers across various conditions (among others: bloodstream infections, endovascular infections as infective endocarditis, central nervous system infections, bone and joint infections, multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) colonisation, sexually transmitted infections, HIV infection, emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases), enabling comprehensive research on disease evolution, treatment outcomes and the identification of biomarkers.

The study adheres to ethical principles outlined by the Helsinki Declaration and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. It has received ethical approval (Comitato Etico CET Lombardia 1, CET 138–2023) and is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06418048). Participants will provide informed consent and can withdraw at any time. The study results will be disseminated through major international conferences and submitted to peer-reviewed research journals.

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06418048.

Intrusive nightmares are a hallmark symptom of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), contributing significantly to psychiatric comorbidities, impaired physical health and diminished social functioning. Currently, no pharmacological treatments are specifically approved for managing PTSD-related nightmares. However, emerging evidence suggests that adrenoceptor-targeting agents may offer therapeutic potential. Notably, clonidine and doxazosin have demonstrated efficacy in reducing PTSD-associated nightmares, as indicated by findings from open-label studies and small randomised controlled trials.

This study is a multicentre, double-blind, randomised (1:1:1), placebo-controlled, parallel-group interventional trial. A total of 189 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive clonidine, doxazosin or placebo, with a once-daily oral dose administered at bedtime for 10 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint is the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale B2 score at week 10, which measures the frequency and intensity of nightmares. Secondary efficacy endpoints include other PTSD-specific symptoms. Additionally, the safety of clonidine and doxazosin will be assessed.

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the State of Berlin (Ethik-Kommission des Landes Berlin) (Reference: 21-683-Haupt-IV E 13), on 14 March 2022 and by the relevant federal authority, the Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte, reference 4044931. The study was conducted in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at both national and international conferences.

NCT05360953, EudraCT 2021-000319-21.

People living with multiple long-term conditions (MLTC) admitted to hospital have worse outcomes and report lower satisfaction with care. Understanding how people living with MLTC admitted to the hospital are cared for is a key step in redesigning systems to better meet their needs. This scoping review aimed to identify existing evidence regarding clinical decision-making and care pathways for people with MLTC admitted to the hospital. In addition, we described research methods used to investigate hospital care for people living with MLTC.

A scoping review methodological framework formed the basis of this review. We took a narrative approach to describe our study findings.

A search of Medline, Embase and PsycInfo electronic databases in July 2024 captured relevant literature published from 1996 to 2024.

Studies that explored care pathways and clinical decision-making for people living with MLTC or co-morbidities, studies conducted fully or primarily in secondary or tertiary care published in English Language and with full text available.

Titles and abstracts were independently screened by two authors. Extracted data included country of origin, aims, study design, any use of an analytical framework or design, type of analyses performed, setting, participant group, number of participants included, health condition(s) studied and main findings. Included studies were categorised as either: studies reviewing existing literature, studies reviewing guidance, studies utilising qualitative methods or ‘other’.

A total of 521 articles were screened, 17 of which met the inclusion criteria. We identified a range of investigative methods. Eight studies used qualitative methods (interviews or focus groups), four were guideline reviews, four were literature reviews and one was classified as ‘other’. Often, researchers choose to combine methods, gathering evidence both empirically and from reviews of existing evidence or guidelines. However, none of the empirical qualitative studies directly or solely investigated clinical decision-making when treating people living with MLTC in acute care and the emergency department. Studies identified complexities in care for people living with MLTC, and some authors attempted to make their own recommendations or draft their own guidance to counter these.

This scoping review highlights the limitations of the current evidence base, which, while diverse in methods, provides sparse insights into clinical decision-making and care pathways for people living with MLTC admitted to hospital. Further research is recommended, including reviews of guidelines and gathering insights from both healthcare professionals and people living with MLTC.