| Literature DB >> 33095840 |
Sungjong Park1, Kyungmee Park1, Jee-Seon Shim2,3, Yoosik Youm4, Junsol Kim4, Eun Lee1, Hyeon Chang Kim2.
Abstract
Sleep misperception has long been a major issue in the field of insomnia research. Most studies of sleep misperception examine sleep underestimation by comparing the results of polysomnography conducted in a laboratory environment with patients' sleep diary entries. We aimed to investigate psychosocial characteristics of adults who underestimated or overestimated sleep time in a nonclinical, middle-aged community-dwelling population. We collected one week of sleep data with wrist-worn accelerometers. We used egocentric social network analysis to analyze the effects of psychosocial factors. Among 4,060 study participants, 922 completed the accelerometer substudy. Underestimation was defined as an accelerometer-measured sleep time ≥ 6 h and a subjective sleep time < 6 h. Overestimation was defined as an objective sleep time < 6 h and a subjective sleep time ≥ 6 h. Psychosocial characteristics of the sleep misperception group were evaluated using multivariate regression analysis. A total of 47 participants underestimated sleep time, and 420 overestimated sleep time. Regression analysis revealed that women, living with spouse, economic satisfaction, and bridging potential had protective effects against sleep underestimation. Blame from a spouse involved a 3.8-times higher risk of underestimation than the control group (p = 0.002). In men, discussing concerns with a spouse had a protective effect against underestimation (p < 0.001). Economic satisfaction, feeling social network-based intimacy, and support from a spouse were associated with overestimation in women. In men, feeling social network-based intimacy was also associated with overestimation (p < 0.001). We found that social relationship quality was related to sleep overestimation and underestimation. This association was marked in women. Good social relationships may have positive effects on sleep misperception via attenuation of negative emotional reactions and effects on emotional regulation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33095840 PMCID: PMC7584196 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241237
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of participants of each sex.
| Women (n = 588) | Men (n = 299) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demographic factors | Age (years) | 53.38 ± 8.41 | 52.55 ± 9.72 | 0.804 |
| Marital status, living with spouse | 491 (83.50) | 283 (94.65) | <0.001 | |
| Education ≥ high school | 506 (86.05) | 284 (94.98) | <0.001 | |
| Economic status, satisfactory | 421 (71.60) | 226 (75.59) | 0.231 | |
| BMI ≥ 25 (Kg/m2) | 188 (31.97) | 145 (48.49) | <0.001 | |
| Smoking, current | 10 (1.70) | 70 (23.41) | <0.001 | |
| Drinking, current | 421 (71.60) | 258 (86.29) | <0.001 | |
| Sleep-related factors | Total sleep time (mins) | 353.45 ± 87.52 | 330.54 ± 136.44 | <0.001 |
| Sleep efficiency | 0.65 ± 0.14 | 0.58 ± 0.16 | <0.001 | |
| Self-reported total sleep time (mins) | 404.93 ± 67.23 | 403.55 ± 64.38 | 0.779 | |
| Berlin score, high risk | 94 (15.99) | 88 (29.43) | <0.001 | |
| Difficulty in sleep induction | 99 (16.84) | 27 (9.03) | 0.002 | |
| Difficulty in sleep maintenance | 82 (13.96) | 22 (7.36) | 0.004 | |
| Psychosocial factors | BDI ≥ 14 | 175 (29.76) | 47 (15.77) | <0.001 |
| Social network size | 4.07 ± 1.55 | 3.80 ± 1.70 | 0.01 | |
| Feeling intimacy in social network | 3.24 ± 0.65 | 3.28 ± 0.64 | 0.451 | |
| Bridging potential, yes | 407 (69.22) | 206 (68.90) | 0.922 | |
| Having friends (≥1) outside of family | 412 (70.07) | 189 (63.21) | 0.039 | |
| Sharing leisure time with spouse | 365 (62.07) | 232 (77.59) | <0.001 | |
| Discussing concerns with spouse | 459 (78.06) | 269 (89.97) | <0.001 | |
| Support from spouse | 441 (75.00) | 248 (82.94) | 0.007 | |
| Blame from spouse | 145 (24.66) | 105 (35.12) | 0.001 | |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; BDI, Beck Depression Inventory; mins, minutes.
Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation for continuous variables or as n (%) for categorical variables.
a p values were calculated with Mann-Whitney tests for continuous variables and χ2-tests for categorical variables.
b measured by accelerometer.
c 2 or more of the categories are positive.
d 3 days or more per week.
e range 1–4 points.
Factors associated with total sleep time underestimation.
| Women | Men | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | |||
| Marital status, living with spouse | 0.22 (0.08 to 0.59) | 0.003 | ||
| Economic status, satisfactory | 0.37 (0.18 to 0.76) | 0.006 | ||
| BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 | 0.36 (0.13 to 0.95) | 0.039 | ||
| Berlin score, high risk | 2.86 (0.98 to 8.33) | 0.054 | ||
| Difficulty in sleep maintenance | 17.1 (3.54 to 82.7) | <0.001 | ||
| Discussing concerns with spouse | 0.08 (0.03 to 0.19) | <0.001 | ||
| Blame from spouse | 3.84 (1.63 to 9.06) | 0.002 | ||
| Bridging potential | 0.35 (0.17 to 0.71) | 0.004 | ||
The table includes only statistically significant variables (full results are in the S3 and S4 Tables).
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, Confidence Interval; OR, Odds ratio.
Factors associated with total sleep time overestimation.
| Women | Men | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | |||
| Education ≥ high school | 0.41 (0.17 to 0.98) | 0.044 | ||
| Economic status, satisfactory | 2.13 (1.12 to 4.05) | 0.021 | ||
| BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 | 0.43 (0.20 to 0.94) | 0.033 | ||
| Difficulty in sleep induction | 0.24 (0.12 to 0.48) | <0.001 | ||
| Difficulty in sleep maintenance | 0.30 (0.09 to 0.94) | 0.04 | ||
| Feeling intimacy in social network | 1.52 (1.15 to 2.00) | 0.003 | 1.93 (1.59 to 2.35) | <0.001 |
| Support from spouse | 2.07 (1.06 to 4.06) | 0.034 | ||
The table includes only statistically significant variables (full results are in the S5 and S6 Tables).
Abbreviations: CI, Confidence Interval; BMI, Body mass index; OR, Odds ratio.