Introduction: Emotional affectivity can be described under two general dimensions: positive affectivity and negative affectivity. It is often assessed by means of questionnaires completed retrospectively by the subjects. The most common scales used are PANAS, DES, and PANA-X. All these scales are based on the concept of two dimensions, negative and positive affective emotions, respectively. Both dimensions mentioned, positive and negative affectivity, can be associated with a bipolar dimensional entity called pleasant-unpleasant. Specifically, a high level of positive emotions and a low level of negative emotions are associated with pleasant/positive feelings (happiness, well-being, satisfaction, cheerfulness, etc.), while a low level of positive emotions and a high level of negative emotions are associated with negative feelings (sadness, anger, nervousness, depression, anxiety, etc.). Materials and Methods: This study is an observational and cross-sectional study. The elements that led to the production of the final database were collected by means of a questionnaire, which included 43 items, 39 of which were specific questions found in the affective distress profile. The questionnaire was administered to 145 patients who had suffered polytrauma and were admitted to the Emergency Hospital of Galati in October 2022. The final centralizing tables included the characteristics of 145 patients, aged between 14 and 64 years. Results: The aim of this study is to identify the level of emotional distress in patients who have suffered polytrauma, so the following scores were evaluated, obtained after the application of PDA: STD, ENF, END. The total distress score was obtained by summing all the negative items found in the PDA questionnaire. Conclusion: Men show a high level of emotional distress compared to women. Polytrauma has a negative effect on patients’ emotional status, with a worrying prevalence of negative functional and dysfunctional emotions. The level of distress in polytrauma patients is high.

Background and Objectives: Artificial intelligence has emerged as a transformative tool in healthcare, offering capabilities such as early diagnosis, personalised treatment, and real-time patient monitoring. In the context of rheumatoid arthritis, a chronic autoimmune disease that demands timely intervention, artificial intelligence shows promise in overcoming diagnostic delays and optimising disease management. This study examines the role of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis, focusing on perceived benefits, challenges, and acceptance levels among healthcare professionals and patients. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a detailed questionnaire distributed to 205 participants, including rheumatologists, general practitioners, and rheumatoid arthritis patients from Romania. The study used descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and logistic regression to analyse AI acceptance in rheumatology. Data visualisation and multiple imputations addressed missing values, ensuring accuracy. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 for hypothesis testing. Results: Respondents with prior experience in artificial intelligence perceived it as more useful for early diagnosis and personalised management of RA (p < 0.001). Familiarity with artificial intelligence concepts positively correlated with acceptance in routine rheumatology practice (ρ = 1.066, p < 0.001). The main barriers identified were high costs (36%), lack of medical staff training (37%), and concerns regarding diagnostic accuracy (21%). Although less frequently mentioned, data privacy concerns remained relevant for a subset of respondents. The study revealed that artificial intelligence could improve diagnostic accuracy and rheumatoid arthritis monitoring, being perceived as a valuable tool by professionals familiar with digital technologies. However, 42% of participants cited the lack of data standardisation across medical systems as a major barrier, underscoring the need for effective interoperability solutions. Conclusions: Artificial intelligence has the potential to revolutionise rheumatoid arthritis management through faster and more accurate diagnoses, personalised treatments, and optimised monitoring. Nevertheless, challenges such as costs, staff training, and data privacy need to be addressed to ensure efficient integration into clinical practice. Educational programmes and interdisciplinary collaboration are essential to increase artificial intelligence adoption in rheumatology.

Background: Elderly patients with COVID-19 often exhibit a complex interplay between hypercoagulability and coagulopathy, key factors in determining the risk of severe complications and mortality. This study aimed to analyze coagulation and inflammatory markers to identify critical predictors of adverse outcomes in this vulnerable population. Material and Methods: The retrospective study was conducted on a sample of 1429 elderly patients (≥60 years) diagnosed with COVID-19, hospitalized in “Sf. Ap. Andrei” St. Apostle Andrew’s County Emergency Hospital in various wards between March 2020 and August 2022. Data were collected from medical records and included inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, ESR) and coagulation markers (prothrombin time, INR, fibrinogen, D-dimer). The SPSS 2.0 statistical software was used to conduct the study. Results:Coagulation markers: Prothrombin activity averaged 74.22%, below normal levels, indicating a heightened bleeding risk, while fibrinogen levels were significantly elevated (mean: 531.69 mg/dL), reflecting hypercoagulability. Prolonged prothrombin time (mean: 17.28 s) and elevated INR (International normalized ratio) (mean: 1.51) were associated with increased mortality, emphasizing their role in risk stratification. Elevated D-dimer levels (mean: 2.75 mg/L) further highlighted thromboembolic risks. Inflammatory markers: C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) showed marked elevations (mean CRP: 92.09 mg/L, mean ESR: 58.47 mm/h), correlating with heightened systemic inflammation and poor outcomes. Bacterial infections: Elevated procalcitonin (mean: 1.98 ng/mL) suggested secondary bacterial infections, particularly in mechanically ventilated patients, significantly worsening prognosis. Conclusions: The duality of hypercoagulability and coagulopathy in elderly COVID-19 patients underscores the importance of consistently monitoring coagulation markers such as prothrombin time, INR, D-dimer, and fibrinogen. Simultaneously, elevated inflammatory markers and secondary bacterial infections require prompt therapeutic interventions. This study highlights the critical need for personalized management strategies to mitigate complications and reduce mortality in this high-risk population.

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterised by systemic inflammation and the progressive damage of joints, significantly impacting patients’ quality of life. Managing this condition requires a complex approach that integrates pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies, alongside psychosocial support and patient education. Aim: This study aims to highlight the importance of an interdisciplinary approach in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, focusing on the role of pharmacological therapies, monitoring treatment response, and the involvement of a multidisciplinary team in the effective management of the disease. Methods: The analysis was based on a review of the specialised literature concerning the role of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs, both conventional and biological), the use of inflammatory markers (CRP and ESR), advanced imaging techniques, and the contribution of various medical specialities to the holistic management of rheumatoid arthritis. A total of 595,900 records were identified, of which 53 studies were ultimately included in the detailed analysis. Relevant studies from fields such as rheumatology, nutrition, psychology, and physical therapy were included. Results: The findings underline that DMARDs, in combination with other pharmacological therapies, remain essential for slowing disease progression. Monitoring treatment response through inflammatory markers and imaging techniques allows for the adjustment of therapeutic strategies and the prevention of complications. An interdisciplinary approach, involving the rheumatologist, general practitioner, physiotherapist, nutritionist, and psychologist, provides significant benefits, such as reducing inflammation, improving joint function, and offering psychosocial support. Conclusions: The effective management of rheumatoid arthritis requires a personalised interdisciplinary approach. Integrating various specialities, along with patient education and psychosocial support, contributes to better disease management, the prevention of disabilities, and improved quality of life. This review is not registered.

The present study started from empathy towards the patient and the fact that medicine is always looking for optimal solutions for the patient's well-being. The state of health, however, is not limited to the physical body, but the psychological mental status, the environment, the recovery time must be taken into account. The medical act is not limited to the life-saving gesture applied at a given moment. Polytrauma requires prompt and safe medical gestures, but the patient does not recover from this tragic episode in the near future. Time, patience, attention, coping mechanisms, psychological wellbeing, and a conducive environment are needed to compete with the previous medical act in order to recover fully and as quickly as possible. The length of hospitalization means financial costs, but the full recovery of the patient, the mental well-being, translates into hidden costs, borne by both the patient and the health system. Based on these ideas, the present study tried to add value to health care. Considering polytrauma as a possible trigger for PTSD, considering recovery as closely related to coping mechanisms, the study aimed to find the linking element in this "polytrauma-recovery" pathway. Why is recovery easier in some cases? Why does the number of hospital days vary in the context of similar physical injuries? Why do cases of higher severity recover more easily than others with lower severity scores? This study set out to explain how trauma and its psychological implications (rumination, nightmares, anxiety, obsessive thoughts about the injury) may be blamed for a more difficult recovery.

Background: Quality of life (QoL) in oncology patients is shaped by the interplay of biological, psychological and treatment-related factors. While prior studies have addressed the independent effects of treatment toxicity and psychological distress, little is known about the interaction between depressive–anxious disorders, kidney failure and haematological toxicity on QoL among patients with head and neck cancer undergoing chemoradiotherapy. Objective: This study aims to examine the combined effect of haematological toxicity, depressive–anxious disorders and chronic renal disease on the total QLQ-H&N43 score, a validated measure of QoL in patients with head and neck cancer. Methods: A total of 93 patients were included in an observational study. PROCESS macro for SPSS was used to test the three-way interaction between haematological toxicity (X), depressive–anxious disorders (W) and kidney failure (Z) on QoL (Y). Results: The three-way interaction was statistically significant (β = 31.04, p = 0.032), accounting for 18.9% of the variance in QLQ-H&N43 scores (R² = 0.1888). Patients presenting both depressive–anxious disorders and renal comorbidities reported higher QoL scores, indicating poorer quality of life in the presence of severe treatment toxicity. Conclusions: Psychological distress and kidney failure may synergistically exacerbate the negative effects of chemoradiotherapy toxicity on quality of life. These findings underscore the need for integrated care models addressing both psychological vulnerability and medical comorbidities in oncology.