Aims The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship of social networking sites (SNSs) addiction on nurses’ performance and how this relationship was mediated by task distraction and moderated by self‐management. Design This cross‐sectional study is designed to empirically test the relationship of SNSs addiction, task distraction, and self‐management with the nurses’ performance. Methods Data were collected by conducting an online survey on nurses across the world using a web‐based questionnaire developed through ‘Google Docs’ and distributed through Facebook from 13 August 2018 – 17 November 2018. The Facebook groups were searched using the selected key terms. In total, 45 groups were found to have relevance to this research; therefore, request was made to the admins of these groups to participate in this research and to post a link in their groups. Only 19 group admins responded positively by uploading a link of the research instrument on their respective group pages and 461 members of these groups participated in the research. Results Results of the data collected from 53 different countries indicated that SNSs addiction results in lowering the nurses’ performance. This relationship is further strengthened by task distraction introduced as a mediating variable. The results show that self‐management mediates the relationship between SNSs addiction and employees’ performance. Moreover, the results of the study confirm that self‐management reduces the negative impact of SNSs addiction on nurses’ performance. Conclusion Social networking sites (SNSs) addiction and task distraction reduce the nurses’ performance, whereas self‐management enhances nurses’ performance. Impact This study addresses the problem of using SNSs at the workplace and its potential effect on nurses’ performance. Results demonstrate that SNSs addiction reduces the performance which is further decreased by task distraction; however, self‐management of nurses can enhance the nurses’ performance. The research has numerous theoretical and practical implications for hospital administration, doctors, and nurses.
Background: The ideal urological method for treating complex, large renal calculi is Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Its instruments, surgical techniques, and positions have all been adjusted as a result of its ever-changing nature. In PCNL, the supine position is advantageous compared to the prone position due to its several advantages, including the absence of cardiopulmonary risks, fewer post operative complications and shorter operative time. This study was designed for comparison of PCNL in prone and supine positions. Methods: After receiving ethical and research committee approval, this retrospective cohort study (comparative study?) was conducted from 2015 to 2021. Out of 623 patients, PCNL in prone position was performed on 258 patients and 365 patients in modified supine position. The patients' demographics, stone size and location, number of tracts, operating time, hospital stay, stone clearance rate, and post-operative complications were all compared. Results: The gender and age of the patients, the size and number of tracts, and location of the stones were all comparable (p>0.05). Operative time for prone position was 82 min±2.49 SD VS 65 min±2.95 SD, for modified supine position, p<0.001), hospital stay was 58 hrs.±1.66 SD for prone VS 51 Hrs.±1.65 SD, for modified supine position, p<0.01) and analgesia requirements for prone position was 41% VS 23% for modified supine position, p<0.001). The stone clearance rate was 87% in supine position and 89% in the prone positioning group (p=0.47). Urinary leakage from tract site was 0.38% in prone vs. 0% in supine position and temperature >99 °F was 12.4% in prone vs. 11.3% in supine position were the most common post-operative complications. Angioembolization was not observed in either group. Blood transfusions were given to 4.26% in prone position and in 3.58% of cases in supine PCNL. Conclusion: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the supine position had a short operating time, short hospital stays, and less analgesia requirements than PCNL in the prone position. In view of the above findings, supine PCNL is easy, quick to perform and having less complications rate as compare to Prone PCNL.
Urothelial carcinomas are cancerous tumors that can affect both the lower and upper urinary system and develop from the urothelial epithelium. The majority of urinary tract cancers (90–95%) are bladder tumors. UTUCs are rare, making up just 5–10% of UCs and their annual prevalence in Western nations is thought to be close to two instances per 100,000 people. This review of the article gives a general overview of the introduction, classification, diagnostic and therapeutic importance of urothelial carcinoma. About 48 recent publications, suitable for literature review, were retrieved from three different databases: PubMed, Sci. hub, and Google scholar. Careful reading and analysis of the literature review was carried out using inclusion and exclusion criteria. Despite significant improvements in prognosis and treatment, such as surgical methods, different adjuvant therapies, radical cystectomy, and robot-assisted radical cystectomy, tumors still recur with a dismal 5-year survival rate, making the addition of novel target-based therapies necessary to improve the overall outcome. Future treatments targeting genomic changes and the immune system should be tailored to each person's molecular profile. The majority of cases of urothelial carcinoma have been linked to numerous risk factors. For individuals with metastatic urothelial cancer, which includes bladder cancer and cancers of the upper urinary tract and urethra, numerous therapy options have been made available recently. These include targeted therapies and immunotherapy. This review recommended the possible way for diagnostic, therapeutic and prognostic implications of urothelial carcinoma.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.