Exploring the indirect effect of loneliness in the association between problematic use of social networks and cognitive function in Lebanese adolescents

BACKGROUND

Problematic use of social networks is a widespread problem that may exert deleterious impacts on cognitive functions. Moreover, studies have added an important link between loneliness and its harmful effect on cognitive functions. Other studies have also revealed that problematic use of social networks among teenagers has a pejorative influence on their social interactions, leading to increased social isolation. Therefore, the goal of our research was to investigate the link between problematic use of social networks and cognitive function in a group of Lebanese adolescents while also taking into consideration the indirect role of loneliness in this relationship.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study, which was carried out between January and April 2022, included 379 teenagers (aged between 13 and 17 years), from all Lebanese governorates. The PROCESS SPSS Macro version 3.4, model four was used to compute three pathways. Pathway A determined the regression coefficient for the effect of problematic use of social networks on loneliness; Pathway B examined the association between loneliness and cognitive function, and Pathway C' estimated the direct effect of problematic use of social networks on cognitive function.

RESULTS

Higher negative social comparison, addictive consequences of problematic use of social networks, and loneliness were significantly associated with worse cognitive function. Loneliness mediated the association between negative social comparison and worse cognitive function, as well as between addictive consequences of problematic use of social networks and worse cognitive function. In addition, higher financial burden was significantly correlated with worse cognitive function, whereas higher physical activity was related to better cognitive function.

CONCLUSION

In sum, the current study supports that problematic use of social networks is negatively associated with adolescents' cognitive function, where loneliness seems to play a pivotal role in this equation. The results thus endorse the importance of helping Lebanese adolescents to overcome problematic use of social networks and recover from their loneliness, to achieve a better cognitive/academic performance.

Assessing sleep quality of Lebanese high school students in relation to lifestyle: pilot study in Beirut

Background

Sleep problems in teenagers seriously disturb the active process of learning. Given the absence of sleep data from Lebanon, a study to determine sleep quality among adolescents is vital.

Aims

To understand sleep habits and patterns that affect sleep quality, and assess the amplitude of possible sleep problems in Lebanese adolescents, raising awareness of the effects of good sleep hygiene on general health in adolescents.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey of 500 high-school students in Beirut was conducted using a self-filled questionnaire inquiring about sociodemographics, health-risk behaviour and sleep quality. The effect of several factors related to sleep habits of the students was investigated using bivariate analysis and logistic regression.

Results

We found that 76.5% of teenagers were not satisfied with their sleep quality; 56% did not have the appropriate amount of sleep (< 8 hours); and 82.4% used mobile phones and electronic devices in bed before falling asleep. Moreover, 3.2% faced a real problem with sleep initiation, 11.3% with sleep maintenance and 8.7% with early awakening.

Conclusions

A large proportion of high-school students in Beirut have poor sleep patterns. It is therefore necessary to increase awareness of the problem in education in order to prevent its escalation.

Use of safety-engineered devices by healthcare workers for intravenous and/or phlebotomy procedures in healthcare settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The acquisition of needle-stick injuries (NSI) in a healthcare setting poses an occupational hazard of transmitting blood-borne pathogens from patients to healthcare workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence about the efficacy and safety of using safety-engineered intravenous devices and safety-engineered phlebotomy devices by HCWs.

Methods

We included randomized and non-randomized studies comparing safety-engineered devices to conventional/standard devices that lack safety features for delivering intravenous injections and/or for blood-withdrawal procedures (phlebotomy). The outcomes of interest included NSI rates, and blood-borne infections rates among HCWs and patients. We conducted an extensive literature search strategy using the OVID interface in October 2013. We followed the standard methods for study selection and data abstraction. When possible, we conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We used the GRADE methodology to assess the quality of evidence by outcome.

Results

We identified twenty-two eligible studies: Twelve assessed safety-engineered devices for intravenous procedures, five for phlebotomy procedures, and five for both. Twenty-one of those studies were observational while one was a randomized trial. All studies assessed the reduction in NSIs among HCWs. For safety-engineered intravenous devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.28 [0.13, 0.59] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.34 [0.08,1.49] (low quality evidence). For safety-engineered phlebotomy devices, the pooled relative risk for NSI per HCW was 0.57 [0.38, 0.84] (moderate quality evidence). The pooled relative risk for NSI per device used or procedure performed was 0.53 [0.43,0.65] (moderate quality evidence). We identified no studies assessing the outcome of blood-borne infections among healthcare workers or patients.

Conclusion

There is moderate-quality evidence that the use of safety-engineered devices in intravenous injections and infusions, and phlebotomy (blood-drawing) procedures reduces NSI rates of HCWs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1705-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, values, preferences, and feasibility in relation to the use of injection safety devices in healthcare settings: a systematic review

Background

Adopting technologies such as injection safety devices in healthcare settings can enhance injection safety. Developing guidelines for appropriate adoption of such technologies need to consider factors beyond evidence for their health effects. The objective of this study is to systematically review the published literature for evidence among healthcare workers and patients about knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, values, preferences, and feasibility in relation to the use of injection safety devices in healthcare settings.

Methods

We included both qualitative and quantitative studies conducted with the general public, patients, and healthcare workers, administrators, or policy makers. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and CENTRAL. We used a duplicate and independent approach to title and abstract screening, full text screening, data abstraction and risk of bias assessment.

Results

Out of a total of 6568 identified citations, we judged fourteen studies as eligible for this systematic review. All these studies were surveys, conducted with healthcare workers in high-income countries. We did not identify any qualitative study, or a study of the general public, patients, healthcare administrators or policy makers. We did not identify any study assessing knowledge, or values assigned to outcomes relevant to injection safety devices. Each of the included studies suffered from methodological limitations, which lowers our confidence in their findings. Based on the findings of six studies, the injection safety devices were generally perceived as easy to use and as an improvement compared with conventional syringes. Some of these studies reported few technical problems while using the devices. In three studies assessing perceived safety, the majority of participants judged the devices as safe. Two studies reported positive perceptions of healthcare workers regarding patient tolerance of these injection safety devices. One study found that less than half the nurses felt comfortable using the insulin pens. Findings from four studies assessing preference and satisfaction were not consistent.

Conclusions

This systematic review identified evidence that injection safety devices are generally perceived as easy to use, safe, and tolerated by patients. There were few reports of technical problems while using the devices and some discomfort by nurses using the insulin pens.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-016-0505-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Safety engineered injection devices for intramuscular, subcutaneous and intradermal injections in healthcare delivery settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Occupational sharps injuries are associated with transmission of bloodborne viruses to healthcare workers, including hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Similarly reuse of syringes in healthcare settings might transmit these infections between patients. The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence about the effects of the use by health care workers of two types of safety engineered injection devices, when delivering intramuscular, subcutaneous, or intradermal injectable medications: sharps injury protection syringes and reuse prevention syringes.

METHODS

We included both randomized and non-randomized studies comparing safety syringes to syringes without safety features. Outcomes of interest included needlestick injuries, and HIV, HBV and HCV infections amongst HCWs (for sharps injury prevention syringes) and patients (for reuse prevention syringes). When possible, we conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We tested results for heterogeneity across studies using the I statistic. We assessed the quality of evidence by outcome using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

We included nine eligible studies: six assessed devices that qualify as sharps injury prevention devices, and three assessed devices that qualify as both injury prevention devices and reuse prevention devices. Eight studies were observational while one was randomized. All studies assessed a single outcome: needle stick injuries among healthcare workers. For sharp injury prevention syringes, the meta-analysis of five studies resulted in a pooled relative risk of 0.54 [0.41, 0.71] for the effect on needlestick injuries per healthcare worker. The associated quality of evidence was rated as moderate. For reuse prevention syringes, data from one study provided a relative risk of 0.40 [0.27, 0.59] for the effect on needlestick injuries per healthcare worker. The associated quality of evidence was rated as moderate. We identified no studies reporting on the effect on the reuse of syringes.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified moderate quality evidence that syringes with sharps injury prevention feature reduce the incidence of needlestick injuries per healthcare worker. We identified no studies reporting data for the remaining outcomes of interest for HCWs. Similarly we identified no studies reporting on the effect of syringes with a reuse prevention feature on the reuse of syringes or on the other outcomes of interest for patients.