The goal of this review was to identify, describe, and evaluate the existing multiple sleep disorders screening questionnaires for their comprehensiveness, brevity, and psychometric quality. A systematic review was conducted using Medline/PubMed, cumulative index to nursing & allied health literature, health and psychosocial instruments and the "grey literature". Search terms were "sleep disorders, screening, questionnaires, and psychometrics". The scope of the search was limited to English language articles for adult age groups from 1989 through 2015. Of the n = 2812 articles identified, most were assessment or treatment guideline reviews, topical reviews, and/or empirical articles. Seven of the articles described multiple sleep disorders screening instruments. Of the identified instruments, two questionnaires (the Holland sleep Disorders questionnaire and sleep-50) were evaluated as comprehensive and one questionnaire (the global sleep assessment questionnaire [GSAQ]) was judged to be both comprehensive and efficient. The GSAQ was found to cover four of the six core intrinsic disorders, sleep insufficiency, and daytime sequela with 11 questions. Accordingly, the GSAQ is the most suitable for application as a general sleep disorders screener. Additional work is required to validate this instrument in the context of primary care. Finally, the future development of multiple sleep disorders screening questionnaires should not only cover all six intrinsic sleep disorders but also acquire some basic demographic information (age, sex, body mass index, presence/absence of bed partner, work status and shift) and some limited data regarding sleep sufficiency and the daytime consequences of sleep disturbance.
Study Objective: Sleep problems may constitute a risk for health problems, including cardiovascular disease, depression, diabetes, poor work performance, and motor vehicle accidents. The primary purpose of this study was to assess the validity of the current Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) sleep questions by establishing the sensitivity and specificity for detection of sleep/ wake disturbance. Methods: Repeated cross-sectional assessment of 300 community dwelling adults over the age of 18 who did not wear CPAP or oxygen during sleep. Reliability and validity testing of the BRFSS sleep questions was performed comparing to BFRSS responses to data from home sleep study, actigraphy for 14 days, Insomnia Severity Index, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and PROMIS-57. Results: Only two of the five BRFSS sleep questions were found valid and reliable in determining total sleep time and excessive daytime sleepiness. I NTRO DUCTI O NThe Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is an ongoing telephone health survey system conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the 50 United States as well as District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam. The purpose of the BRFSS is to track health risk behaviors, preventive health practices, and health care access primarily related to chronic disease and injury. The use of the system started in 1984 and continues monthly. More than 350,000 adults are interviewed each year. Information from the surveys is used in research and clinical practice, and is frequently used to support public health policies and health-related legislative efforts. 1In early 2000, the CDC, in collaboration with the National Sleep Foundation, facilitated a work group charged with raising awareness about, increasing the understanding of, and reducing the impact of sleep deprivation and sleep disorders. In response to the work group's recommendations, the sleep question that was initiated in the BRFSS in 1995 was expanded upon with four optional module questions to capture sleep related symptoms. The current BRFSS sleep questions are: (1) During the past 30 days for about how many days have you felt you did not get enough rest or sleep; (2) On average, how many hours of sleep do you get in a 24-hour period? Think about the time you actually spend sleeping or napping, not just the amount of sleep you think you should get; (3) Do you snore; (4) During the past 30 days, for about how many days did you find yourself unintentionally falling asleep during the day; and (5) During the past 30 days, have you ever nodded off or fallen asleep, even just for a brief moment, while driving? The questions were implemented into the state telephone surveys around 2005, but to date, evidence of their validation is lacking. Therefore, a study was performed to assess the reliability and validity of the BRFSS sleep questions to determine their sensitivity to detect sleep disorders and insufficient sleep in adults. Establishing questions that will accurately identif...
Paper sleep diaries are the gold standard for assessment of sleep continuity variables in clinical practice as well as research. Unfortunately, paper diaries can be filled out weekly instead of daily, lost, illegible or destroyed; and are considered out of date according to the newer technology savvy generations. In this study, we assessed the reliability and validity of using a wrist-worn electronic sleep diary. Design. A prospective design was used to compare capturing 14 days of sleep continuity data via paper to a wrist-worn electronic device that also captured actigraphy data. Results. Thirty-five healthy community dwelling adults with mean (sd) age of 36 (15), 80% Caucasians, and 74% females were enrolled. All sleep continuity variables via electronic and paper diary capture methods were significantly correlated with moderate, positive relationships. Assessment of validity revealed that electronic data capture had a significant relationship with objective measure of sleep continuity variables as measured by actigraphy. Paper diary variables were not significantly associated with objective measures. Conclusions. The use of a wrist-worn device to capture daily sleep diary data is as accurate as and for some variables more accurate than using paper diaries.
Background Adequate sleep is vital for health and quality of life. People with stroke and a concomitant sleep disorder may have poorer outcomes than those without a sleep disorder. Objective To systematically evaluate the published literature to determine the impact of sleep disorders on physical, functional recovery at the activity and participation level after stroke. Methods A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycINFO. Studies were selected that reported outcomes on physical, functional recovery at the activity and participation levels in participants with stroke and a diagnosed sleep disorder. A meta-analysis was performed on included studies that reported Barthel Index (BI) and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores. Results: A total of 33 studies were included in the systematic review with 9 of them in the meta-analysis. The mean mRS score was 0.51 points higher in participants with stroke and sleep disorders versus participants with stroke without sleep disorder [95% CI: 0.23-0.78]. The mean BI score was 10.2 points lower in participants with stroke and sleep disorders versus participants with stroke without sleep disorder [95% CI: −17.9 to −2.6]. Conclusions People with stroke and a sleep disorder have greater functional limitations and disability than those without a sleep disorder. Rehabilitation professionals should screen their patients with stroke for potential sleep disorders and further research is needed to develop sleep and rehabilitation interventions that can be delivered in combination. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019125562.
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.