Boy using a mobile phone under his desk at school

TOP TRENDS

Boy using a mobile phone under his desk at school.
Photo:  Alamy

Children 'becoming hunchbacks' due to addiction to smart phones
by Victoria Ward, The Telegraph, 

16 October 2015

Chiropractor claims that young people who spend hours hunched over electronic devices are seriously damaging their necks and spines, as witnessed by the rise in cases of 'text neck'

Children as young as seven are developing hunchbacks and curved spines because of the hours spent bending over smart phones and tablets, a chiropractor has claimed.

Dr James Carter warned that he had seen an "alarming increase" in the condition, which he called "text neck".

He said patients often came in complaining of a headache but that a simple heel-to-toe test revealed that they had developed a backwards curve in the neck having spent hours hunched over electronic devices.

"I have started seeing lots of cases over the past two years, especially in young schoolchildren and teenagers," Dr Carter told Daily Mail Australia.

"The condition is called 'text neck' because it is often caused when people sit with their heads dropped forward looking at their devices for several hours at a time.

"Instead of a normal forward curve, patients can be seen to have a backwards curve. It can be degenerative, often causing head, neck, shoulder and back pain.

"Many patients come in complaining they have a headache, but we actually find text neck is the cause of it. They often fail a simple heel-to-toe test and tend to fall over."

• Are smartphones making our children mentally ill?

Sammy Margo, from the UK's Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, agreed that "text neck" was on the rise.

She said: "When you drop your chin on to your chest for a long period you are stretching the whole structure.

"Eventually, in conjunction with a sedentary lifestyle, it could lead to serious consequences."

Dr Carter, from Niagara Park on Australia's New South Wales Central Coast, warned that the condition could lead to anxiety and depression as well as spinal damage.

And he said 50 per cent of the patients he diagnosed were school-aged children and teenagers.

A recent survey by the consultancy ComRes for Channel 4 News found just over half of parents worried their kids were exposed to sexual content on their electronic devices, while 52 per cent said they were worried about them meeting strangers online.

It also found that children spend an average of nearly three hours a day in front of their screens – whether playing games, watching videos on YouTube or using social media.

Dr Carter advised avoiding using laptops or phones while sitting or lying in bed and raising monitors or devices to eye level.

Dr Chris McCarthy, a consultant spinal physiotherapist at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust in London, cautioned against the use of X-rays to diagnose such a condition.

He expressed concern that patients suspecting they had the condition would go to their GP and expect to have an X-ray, which he said were not recommended in the treatment of neck pain and would expose them to unnecessary radiation.

Whilst he said he had heard of "text neck", he suggested that the broader problem was more likely to stem from a sedentary lifestyle and a general lack of exercise.

"Non-specific neck pain can be related to sedentary postures," he said.

"As physios, we would support a notion that if a child does not do any exercise and stays in a static position playing computer games and on Facebook there is more chance they will get spinal pain, including in the neck."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11935291/Children-becoming-hunchbacks-due-to-addiction-to-smart-phones.html

I don't trust nurses. I don't pay attention to what they say

TOP TRENDS
At a recent training program in quality and safety improvement, one focusing on the topic of communication in clinical settings, a second year resident said firmly, "I don't trust nurses. I don't pay attention to what they say."

Now, this might be a case of extrapolation from something that residents are often told, "Don't trust anybody." In that context, "trust" is not used the way commonly understood. No, in that case, it means, "Do your own analysis of the patient's condition and don't assume that what you heard from someone else is still correct." That's fine.

But that wasn't the context of this young doctor's remark. Here, rather, was an affirmative statement about the value of nurses and about their judgment.

We could consider this an isolated case of an arrogant person and let it go at that, but I fear what we saw here is a more commonly occurring disrespect for those "underneath us" in many clinical settings, manufacturing industries, and service organizations.

Here's a story about a young, wise doctor named Michael Howell, excerpted from my book Goal Play!

Michael had some intuition about how to solve the problem of decompensating patients based on his literature review of articles from Australia. Early in 2005, he led a six-week pilot program on two medical wards and one surgical ward to test out his version of rapid response teams. Under this program, if a nurse notices that a patient has developed a certain condition, based on a standardized set of criteria (“triggers”), the nurse is required to call the doctor, the senior nurse in charge, and the respiratory therapist—and they all come to see the patient. They collaborate on a plan of care for the patient going forward. Regardless of the time of day or night, the intern/resident then calls the attending doctor in charge of the patient to let him/her know that the patient has “triggered."

Under Michael’s plan, the standard set of triggers is based on changes in heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, urine output, an acute change in the patient’s conscious state, or a marked nursing concern. The last one, “marked nursing concern,” means that if the nurse has any concern whatsoever about the patient, based on observation or instinct, s/he is authorized to call a trigger.

Well, it turned out that Howell’s program was incredibly effective.

Over the course of the first year, the hospital observed significant reductions in “code blue” cardiac arrest events and a significant reduction (a 47% decrease) in relative risk of non-ICU death for our patients. Residents now needed to practice emergency resuscitation mainly in the simulation center because so few actual patients needed it. What a lovely problem to have. We also learned a lot about teamwork, communication, and systems of care as a result of closely reviewing our responses to called triggers.

Here's something else we learned over time. There were many objections at the start of this program from attending physicians and residents that certain "lazy" or "inexperienced" or "uninformed" nurses would use the RRT "marked nursing concern" trigger as an excuse to pass the buck on certain patients.

Well, we learned instead that triggers based on "marked nursing concern" (amounting over several years to 38% in total and 18% in the absence of other vital sign criteria) were as or more likely than the other categories to accurately reflect the fact that a patient was in trouble. Putting it another way, if we had not recognized the unique ability of nurses to be especially attentive to patients' conditions, a number of people at our hospital would have decompensated, perhaps leading to their death. (The 18% figure amounts to over a thousand patients during the five-year study period.)


When you think about it, then, the attitude reflected in the resident's statement--"I don't trust nurses. I don't pay attention to what they say."--is not just arrogant. It is negligent. Research of malpractice claims shows that a failure in communication is often a contributing cause to the error leading to a lawsuit.
As Kathleen Bartholomew notes: "When nurses and physician don't communicate, it's the patient who loses every time." A person who has decided that he or she will habitually ignore the information provided by another member of the team invites error and harm.

I surely never want to be cared for by this young doctor! Who is more likely to have an accurate sense of the patient's condition than the nurse? After all, nurses are at the patient's bedside for much of the day, while doctors drop by from time to time. Attentiveness to a patient's needs cannot be measured by whether an "MD" follows a clinician's name instead of an "RN."