Smartphones, the Epidemic of the 21st Century: A Possible Source of Addictions and Neuropsychiatric Consequences.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Phonoholism is the excessive and harmful use of a smartphone. We are now observing this phenomenon among adults more often. Using a smartphone for several hours may lead to somatic and psychological symptoms, such as headaches and depression. The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence of phonoholism and to assess the association between smartphone overuse and neuropsychiatric disorders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 368 people (70.1% were woman), aged between 19 and 82 years (average age 26.1), took part in an anonymous questionnaire consisting of the following elements: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Mobile Phone Problem Use Scale (MPPUS-9), and original questions regarding headaches and sleep quality, along with a subjective assessment of the use of smartphones and an objective evaluation based on data from the applications "Stay Free" and "Screen Time". RESULTS: A total of 61 respondents (16.6%) obtained a score on the MPPUS-9 scale, which revealed their problematic use of mobile devices. Patients with phonoholism had significantly more headaches (85% vs. 58.7%, p = 0.027). Subjects with phonoholism had significantly shorter mean sleep duration (7.14 h vs. 7.42 h, p = 0.0475) and were less likely to feel sleepy during the day (43.33% vs. 59.73%, p = 0.0271). The group with phonoholism had significantly higher scores on the HADS-A anxiety scale (8.29 vs. 10.9, p = 0.015), but a statistical significance was not confirmed for depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The excessive use of the telephone negatively affects both somatic and mental health and can pose a significant clinical problem.

Inter-Specialty Controversies on the Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases during Pregnancy: A Questionnaire Study.

Background and Objectives: Management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) during pregnancy is challenging and usually requires eminence-based decisions due to limited strong-evidence data in this field. The purpose of our study was to compare the attitudes of anaesthesiologists, cardiologists, and gynaecologists towards the diagnosis and treatment of potentially life-threatening CVDs during pregnancy. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was performed among 111 doctors (55 anaesthesiologists, 36 cardiologists, 20 gynaecologists). Personal opinions on the recommendations (n = 19) regarding rare, potentially life-threatening CVDs during pregnancy were recorded using a five-item Likert scale. Results: Opinions regarding eight statements (42%) varied substantially between specialties (p < 0.05). The most distinctive differences between physicians concerned the following recommendations: "thrombolysis should only be used in pulmonary embolism with cardiogenic shock" (agree: 52.7% of anaesthesiologists, 80.4% of cardiologists, 25.0% of gynaecologists; p < 0.001); "women with the antiphospholipid syndrome should restart treatment with vitamin K antagonists from the second trimester of pregnancy" (agree: 12.7% of anaesthesiologists, 69.4% of cardiologists, 20.0% of gynaecologists; p < 0.001); "women with symptomatic pulmonary hypertension should have a Swan-Ganz catheter inserted for labour" (agree: 20.0% of anaesthesiologists, 11.1% of cardiologists, 55.0% of gynaecologists; p = 0.001). Conclusions: Physicians' opinions regarding diagnostics and treatment of CVDs in pregnancy remain controversial. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of management in these unique medical conditions.