Eleni Kakalou

In the last three years, the European Union (EU) is being confronted with the most significant influx of migrants and refugees since World War II. Although the dimensions of this influx-taking the global scale into account-might be regarded as modest, the institutional response to that phenomenon so far has been suboptimal, including the health sector. While inherent challenges of refugee and migrant (R&M) health are well established, it seems that the EU health response oversees, to a large extend, these aspects. A whole range of emergency-driven health measures have been implemented throughout Europe, yet they are failing to address adequately the changing health needs and specific vulnerabilities of the target population. With the gradual containment of the migratory and refugee waves, three years after the outbreak of the so-called 'refugee crisis', we are, more than ever, in need of a sustainable and comprehensive health approach that is aimed at the integration of all of migrants and refugees-that is, both the new and old population groups that are already residing in Europe-in the respective national health systems.

Nine years after the earthquake in Haiti and the appearance of the concept of “humanitarian drones”, it remains a poorly discussed yet highly controversial issue. Emergency mapping and light cargo deliveries to inaccessible areas are only some of the most popular ways in which drones are currently used for post-disaster relief and health crisis management by first responders around the world. On the other hand, every single successful use for drones is always followed by controversy about the problems caused by that very same, initially successful, use. However, examples of good practices will contribute to the investigation, study and analysis of the ways in which new, cutting-edge technologies such as drones can be implemented and adapted to meet the needs and requirements of humanitarian organisations and local communities affected by disasters. The issue is how and under what circumstances drone use can potentially fulfil humanitarian functions, particularly in the aftermath of a disaster, and how this type of technology could be deployed in non-violent, ethically desirable ways as part of the humanitarian response. In conclusion, it is questionable whether the benefits of using drones outnumber the moral obstacles they raise, and whether they will eventually be considered an inseparable part of humanitarian aid as well as a cutting-edge technological toy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate the efficacy (prognosis, coagulation/inflammation biomarkers) and safety (bleeding events) of different anticoagulation dosages in COVID-19 inpatients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: COVID-19 inpatients (Athens, Greece) were included. The "Enhanced dose THRomboprophylaxis in Admissions (ETHRA)" protocol was applied in certain Departments, suggesting the use of intermediate anticoagulation dosage. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation/venous thromboembolism/death. Inflammation/coagulation parameters were assessed. RESULTS: Among 127 admissions, 95 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one events (4 deaths, 17 intubations) were observed. Regression analysis demonstrated significant reduction of events with intermediate or therapeutic dosage [HR=0.16 (95%CI=0.05-0.52) p=0.002; HR=0.17 (0.04-0.71) p=0.015, respectively]. D-Dimer values were higher in those who met the composite endpoint. Intermediate dosage treatment was associated with decreased values of ferritin. Three patients (3%) had minor hemorrhagic complications. CONCLUSION: Anticoagulation treatment (particularly intermediate dosage) appears to have positive impact on COVID-19 inpatients' prognosis by inhibiting both coagulation and inflammatory cascades.

Background: In 2015-2016, more than a million refugees entered Greece. Along with other organizations, PRAKSIS, a local non-governmental organization, deployed mobile medical units on three islands and in temporary settlements in Athens. Methods: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study aimed at analysing the demographic and clinical characteristics of the population (n=6688) that received services from PRAKSIS between October 2015 and June 2016 in different locations (islands of Samos, Kos and Leros in the southeastern Aegean Sea and on the mainland at Athens-Piraeus Port Gate E) before and after the closure of European borders in March 2016. Results: The majority (88%) of the population came from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. Among them, 53% were women and children. Infectious diseases decreased as the population moved from the islands to the Athens-Piraeus Port, while all other disease categories increased in relative frequency, the difference being statistically significant (p<0.05). Among all consultations, dental and oral cavity health complaints also increased in the Athens-Piraeus Port, but failed to reach statistical significance (p=0.11). Referrals from the mobile health units to specialist care rose from 4.2% of all patients clinically examined on the islands to 9.9% in the Athens-Piraeus Port, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusions: More research and systematic data collection are needed to inform appropriate policies for the humanitarian challenges posed by the recent refugee and migrant waves in Europe.