Charlotte Russell1, Alison J Wearden1, Gillian Fairclough2, Richard A Emsley3, Simon D Kyle4. 1. School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, United Kingdom. 2. Department of Clinical Health Psychology, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom. 3. Centre for Biostatistics, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, United Kingdom. 4. Sleep and Circadian Neuroscience Institute (SCNi), Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Sir William Dunn School of Pathology, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to (1) examine the relationship between subjective and actigraphy-defined sleep, and next-day fatigue in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS); and (2) investigate the potential mediating role of negative mood on this relationship. We also sought to examine the effect of presleep arousal on perceptions of sleep. METHODS: Twenty-seven adults meeting the Oxford criteria for CFS and self-identifying as experiencing sleep difficulties were recruited to take part in a prospective daily diary study, enabling symptom capture in real time over a 6-day period. A paper diary was used to record nightly subjective sleep and presleep arousal. Mood and fatigue symptoms were rated four times each day. Actigraphy was employed to provide objective estimations of sleep duration and continuity. RESULTS: Multilevel modelling revealed that subjective sleep variables, namely sleep quality, efficiency, and perceiving sleep to be unrefreshing, predicted following-day fatigue levels, with poorer subjective sleep related to increased fatigue. Lower subjective sleep efficiency and perceiving sleep as unrefreshing predicted reduced variance in fatigue across the following day. Negative mood on waking partially mediated these relationships. Increased presleep cognitive and somatic arousal predicted self-reported poor sleep. Actigraphy-defined sleep, however, was not found to predict following-day fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time we show that nightly subjective sleep predicts next-day fatigue in CFS and identify important factors driving this relationship. Our data suggest that sleep specific interventions, targeting presleep arousal, perceptions of sleep and negative mood on waking, may improve fatigue in CFS.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to (1) examine the relationship between subjective and actigraphy-defined sleep, and next-day fatigue in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS); and (2) investigate the potential mediating role of negative mood on this relationship. We also sought to examine the effect of presleep arousal on perceptions of sleep. METHODS: Twenty-seven adults meeting the Oxford criteria for CFS and self-identifying as experiencing sleep difficulties were recruited to take part in a prospective daily diary study, enabling symptom capture in real time over a 6-day period. A paper diary was used to record nightly subjective sleep and presleep arousal. Mood and fatigue symptoms were rated four times each day. Actigraphy was employed to provide objective estimations of sleep duration and continuity. RESULTS: Multilevel modelling revealed that subjective sleep variables, namely sleep quality, efficiency, and perceiving sleep to be unrefreshing, predicted following-day fatigue levels, with poorer subjective sleep related to increased fatigue. Lower subjective sleep efficiency and perceiving sleep as unrefreshing predicted reduced variance in fatigue across the following day. Negative mood on waking partially mediated these relationships. Increased presleep cognitive and somatic arousal predicted self-reported poor sleep. Actigraphy-defined sleep, however, was not found to predict following-day fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time we show that nightly subjective sleep predicts next-day fatigue in CFS and identify important factors driving this relationship. Our data suggest that sleep specific interventions, targeting presleep arousal, perceptions of sleep and negative mood on waking, may improve fatigue in CFS.
Authors: Colleen E Carney; Daniel J Buysse; Sonia Ancoli-Israel; Jack D Edinger; Andrew D Krystal; Kenneth L Lichstein; Charles M Morin Journal: Sleep Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: M Pilar Martínez; Elena Miró; Ana I Sánchez; Carolina Díaz-Piedra; Rafael Cáliz; Johan W S Vlaeyen; Gualberto Buela-Casal Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2013-06-07
Authors: Colleen E Carney; Jack D Edinger; Charles M Morin; Rachel Manber; Bruce Rybarczyk; Edward J Stepanski; Helen Wright; Leon Lack Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Rosane Nisenbaum; James F Jones; Elizabeth R Unger; Michele Reyes; William C Reeves Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2003-10-03 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Noelle E Carlozzi; Jenna Freedman; Jonathan P Troost; Traci Carson; Ivan R Molton; Dawn M Ehde; Kayvan Najarian; Jennifer A Miner; Nicholas R Boileau; Anna L Kratz Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Alison E Carney; Delainey L Wescott; Nicole E Carmona; Colleen E Carney; Kathryn A Roecklein Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2022-05-18 Impact factor: 6.533
Authors: Tamara E Lacourt; Elisabeth G Vichaya; Gabriel S Chiu; Robert Dantzer; Cobi J Heijnen Journal: Front Behav Neurosci Date: 2018-04-26 Impact factor: 3.558
Authors: Daniel Vethe; Håvard Kallestad; Henrik B Jacobsen; Nils Inge Landrø; Petter C Borchgrevink; Tore C Stiles Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2018-09-21