BACKGROUND: Smartphones have become indispensable tools for students. However, excessive use can lead to smartphone addiction, causing physiological, psychological and social harm. Nursing students represent a unique population whose smartphone use may differ from other disciplines due to clinical training demands.
METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Seven databases were systematically searched from inception to August 2023. Inclusion criteria encompassed original research on smartphone addiction, harms and risks among nursing students. Data were extracted and thematically synthesized.
RESULTS: Studies (n=39) met inclusion criteria, representing 15 countries. Rates of smartphone addiction among nursing students ranged from 19% to 72%, averaging 40-50%. Incorporated into Engel's biopsychosocial models, the harm is emphasized across individual inclinations, emotional aspects, cognitive processes and executive functions. Physiological harms include sleep disruption, vision concerns,other physiological concerns. psychologically, addiction correlated with increased anxiety and depression,decline in self-esteem, learning and attention and other psychological concerns. socially, it encompasses harms such as interpersonal relationships challenges, career development and decline in social abilities. The I-PACE model identifies various risk factors for smartphone addiction among nursing students, including personal factors such as interpersonal relationship anxiety and perceived academic pressure, affective factors like high stress and learning burnout, cognitive factors such as the need for online social interaction and low perception of social support, as well as executive factors like extended usage duration, poor self-control and usage before sleep.
CONCLUSION: Smartphone addiction among nursing students presents tangible harms. A proposed theoretical model integrating established frameworks provides avenues to better comprehend addiction genesis and potential intervention strategies. Given addiction's multi-factorial nature, future research investigating harm mitigation through optimizing predisposing, precipitating and perpetuating factors is warranted.
AIM: We compared different demographic, clinical, and echocardiographic characteristics between patients with AF+HF and patients with AF only. Furthermore, we explored whether concurrent HF independently predicts several outcomes (all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (IS/SE), major bleeding, and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB)).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparisons between the AF+HF and the AF-only group were carried out. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were constructed for each outcome to assess whether HF was predictive of any of them while controlling for possible confounding factors.
RESULTS: A total of 2020 patients were included in this study: 481 had AF+HF; 1539 had AF only. AF+HF patients were older, more commonly males, and had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, coronary artery disease, and chronic kidney disease (p≤0.05). Furthermore, AF+HF patients more commonly had pulmonary hypertension and low ejection fraction (p≤0.001). Finally, HF was independently predictive of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 2.17, 95% CI (1.66-2.85) and cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR 2.37, 95% CI (1.68-3.36).
CONCLUSION: Coexisting AF+HF was associated with a more labile and higher-risk population among Jordanian patients. Furthermore, coexisting HF independently predicted higher all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Efforts should be made to efficiently identify such cases early and treat them aggressively.
METHODS: Two electronic academic databases were searched: Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) using specific keywords as search terms derived from the PCC framework with no specific time limit. The search strategy was developed based on the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and utilised the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Data on the risk of violence, intervening factors, and aggressive behavior were extracted from the included studies. Further analysis was performed whereby similar data were grouped and synthesised together.
RESULTS: The initial search produced 342 studies. However, only nine studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The nine studies included 1,068 adult forensic inpatients from various psychiatric hospitals. Only mediation studies reported significant mechanisms of influence between the risk of violence and aggressive behavior. It is postulated that the human agency factor may be the underlying factor that influences a person's functioning and the subsequent series of events between the risk of violence and aggression.
CONCLUSIONS: In light of the paucity of evidence in this area, a generalised conclusion cannot be established. More studies are warranted to address the gaps before conclusive recommendations can be proposed to the relevant stakeholders.