Elizabeth Capezuti1, Rana Sagha Zadeh2, Nicole Woody3, Aleksa Basara4, Ana C Krieger5. 1. 1 School of Nursing, Hunter College and The Graduate Center, City University of New York , New York, New York. 2. 2 Department of Design and Environmental Analysis, Cornell University , Ithaca, New York. 3. 3 Healthcare Strategy and Operations Consultant , New York, New York. 4. 4 Department of Economics, Health Design Innovations Laboratory, Department of Design and Environmental Analysis, Cornell University , Ithaca, New York. 5. 5 Departments of Medicine, Neurology, and Genetic Medicine, Center for Sleep Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical Center , New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep fragmentation is common among those with advanced serious illness. Nonpharmacological interventions to improve sleep have few, if any, adverse effects and are often underutilized in these settings. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to summarize the literature related to nonpharmacological interventions to improve sleep among adults with advanced serious illness. METHODS: We systematically searched six electronic databases for literature reporting sleep outcomes associated with nonpharmacological interventions that included participants with advanced serious illness during the period of 1996-2016. RESULTS: From a total of 2731 results, 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 31 individual interventions were identified, each evaluated individually and some in combination with other interventions. Twelve of these studies employed either multiple interventions within an intervention category (n = 8) or a multicomponent intervention consisting of interventions from two or more categories (n = 5). The following intervention categories emerged: sleep hygiene (1), environmental (6), physical activity (4), complementary health practices (11), and mind-body practices (13). Of the 42 studies, 22 demonstrated a statistically significant, positive impact on sleep and represented each of the categories. The quality of the studies varied considerably, with 17 studies classified as strong, 17 as moderate, and 8 as weak. CONCLUSIONS: Several interventions have been demonstrated to improve sleep in these patients. However, the small number of studies and wide variation of individual interventions within each category limit the generalizability of findings. Further studies are needed to assess interventions and determine effectiveness and acceptability.
BACKGROUND: Sleep fragmentation is common among those with advanced serious illness. Nonpharmacological interventions to improve sleep have few, if any, adverse effects and are often underutilized in these settings. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to summarize the literature related to nonpharmacological interventions to improve sleep among adults with advanced serious illness. METHODS: We systematically searched six electronic databases for literature reporting sleep outcomes associated with nonpharmacological interventions that included participants with advanced serious illness during the period of 1996-2016. RESULTS: From a total of 2731 results, 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 31 individual interventions were identified, each evaluated individually and some in combination with other interventions. Twelve of these studies employed either multiple interventions within an intervention category (n = 8) or a multicomponent intervention consisting of interventions from two or more categories (n = 5). The following intervention categories emerged: sleep hygiene (1), environmental (6), physical activity (4), complementary health practices (11), and mind-body practices (13). Of the 42 studies, 22 demonstrated a statistically significant, positive impact on sleep and represented each of the categories. The quality of the studies varied considerably, with 17 studies classified as strong, 17 as moderate, and 8 as weak. CONCLUSIONS: Several interventions have been demonstrated to improve sleep in these patients. However, the small number of studies and wide variation of individual interventions within each category limit the generalizability of findings. Further studies are needed to assess interventions and determine effectiveness and acceptability.
Authors: Stacey Young-McCaughan; Mary Z Mays; Sonya M Arzola; Linda H Yoder; Stacey A Dramiga; Kenneth M Leclerc; John R Caton; Robert L Sheffler; Marilyn U Nowlin Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2003 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Philip D Sloane; Christianna S Williams; C Madeline Mitchell; John S Preisser; Wendy Wood; Ann Louise Barrick; Susan E Hickman; Karminder S Gill; Bettye Rose Connell; Jack Edinger; Sheryl Zimmerman Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2007-08-21 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Glenna A Dowling; Robert L Burr; Eus J W Van Someren; Erin M Hubbard; Jay S Luxenberg; Judy Mastick; Bruce A Cooper Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2007-12-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Karen K Swenson; Mary Jo Nissen; Kathryn Knippenberg; Annemiek Sistermans; Paul Spilde; Elaine M Bell; Julia Nissen; Cathleen Chen; Michaela L Tsai Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2014 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Elizabeth Capezuti; Rana Sagha Zadeh; Michael Ames Brigham; Brooke Ana Dias; Benjamin Chanhee Kim; Evie Lengetti; Belle Erikson; Nancy Swezey; Ana C Krieger Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 3.234