| Literature DB >> 31905204 |
Mariam Louis1, Kasey Treger1, Tracy Ashby1, Carmen Smotherman1, Shiva Gautum1, Vandana Seeram1, James Cury1, Lisa Jones1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There exist conflicting data regarding the accuracy of ICU nurses accurately assessing patient sleep using validated questionnaires. Using the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RSQ), we hypothesize that patient factors might influence nursing perception of their sleep.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31905204 PMCID: PMC6944385 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226323
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Baseline characteristics of study participants.
| characteristics | Overall | Males | Females |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age in years | 55 (22–83) | 54.5 (22–75) | 56 (25–83) |
| Race, n (%) | |||
| White | 18 (47.3) | 9 (56.3) | 9 (40.9) |
| Black | 18 (47.3) | 6 (37.5) | 12 (54.5) |
| Other | 2 (5.2) | 1 (6.3) | 1 (4.5) |
| ICU admission diagnosis, n (%) | |||
| Sepsis (non-pulmonary) | 8 (21.1) | 5 (32.1) | 3 (13.6) |
| Respiratory failure | 13 (34.2) | 4 (25) | 9 (40.9) |
| Altered Mental Status | 6 (15.8) | 2 (12.5) | 4 (18.1) |
| GI | 2 (5.2) | 1 (6.2) | 1 (4.5) |
| Other | 9 (23.7) | 4 (25) | 5 (22.7) |
Data is count (percent), unless otherwise specified by
*median (range)
Comparison of patient versus nurse Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) score.
| Patient (avg. score) | Nurse (avg. score) | Difference (95% CI) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Question 1-Sleep depth | 49.7 (33.3) | 44.6 (28.3) | 5.1 (-3.8, 14.0) | 0.25 |
| Question 2-Sleep latency | 54.6 (32.3) | 51.3 (24.3) | 3.3 (-7.6, 14.1) | 0.55 |
| Question 3-Awakenings | 53.7 (34.2) | 48.3 (25.2) | 5.4 (-5.1, 15.9) | 0.31 |
| Question 4-Returning to sleep | 51.8 (32.4) | 54.6 (28.7) | -2.8 (-14.1, 9.1) | 0.64 |
| Question 5-Sleep quality | 50.8 (31.0) | 49.7 (28.7) | 1.1 (-7.6, 9.8) | 0.78 |
| Total Score (AVERAGE ITEMS 1–5) | 52.1 (24.9) | 49.7 (23.1) | 2.4 (-4.9, 9.7) | 0.51 |
Cicchetti* intraclass correlation (ICC) between patient and nursing survey results.
| 0.57 (95%CI 0.35, 0.76) | |
| Male | 0.84 (95%CI 0.65, 0.94) |
| Female | 0.25 (95%CI 0.04, 0.73) |
| Black | 0.46 (95%CI 0.17, 0.79) |
| Non-Black | 0.67 (95%CI 0.40, 0.86) |
| Less than 50 years old | 0.44 (95%CI 0.12, 0.82) |
| More than 50 years old | 0.57 (95%CI 0.31, 0.80) |
| Respiratory | 0.43 (95%CI 0.11, 0.82) |
| Non-Respiratory | 0.66 (95%CI 0.43, 0.84) |
* Cicchetti (1994) gives the following interpretation for ICC: Less than 0.40—poor; Between 0.40 and 0.59—Fair; Between 0.60 and 0.74—Good; and Between 0.75 and 1.00—Excellent.