影响重症监护病房睡眠质量的因素:韩国的一项描述性试点研究。

IF 1.7 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Acute and Critical Care Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.4266/acc.2023.00514
Yoon Hae Ahn, Hong Yeul Lee, Sang-Min Lee, Jinwoo Lee
{"title":"影响重症监护病房睡眠质量的因素:韩国的一项描述性试点研究。","authors":"Yoon Hae Ahn,&nbsp;Hong Yeul Lee,&nbsp;Sang-Min Lee,&nbsp;Jinwoo Lee","doi":"10.4266/acc.2023.00514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As sleep disturbances are common in the intensive care unit (ICU), this study assessed the sleep quality in the ICU and identified barriers to sleep.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients admitted to the ICUs of a tertiary hospital between June 2022 and December 2022 who were not mechanically ventilated at enrollment were included. The quality of sleep (QoS) at home was assessed on a visual analog scale as part of an eight-item survey, while the QoS in the ICU was evaluated using the Korean version of the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (K-RCSQ). Good QoS was defined by a score of ≥50.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 30 patients in the study, 19 reported a QoS score <50. The Spearman correlation coefficient showed no meaningful relationship between the QoS at home and the overall K-RCSQ QoS score in the ICU (r=0.16, P=0.40). The most common barriers to sleep were physical discomfort (43%), being awoken for procedures (43%), and feeling unwell (37%); environmental factors including noise (30%) and light (13%) were also identified sources of sleep disruption. Physical discomfort (median [interquartile range]: 32 [28.0-38.0] vs. 69 [42.0-80.0], P=0.004), being awoken for procedures (36 [20.0-48.0] vs. 54 [36.0-80.0], P=0.04), and feeling unwell (31 [18.0-42.0] vs. 54 [40.0-76.0], P=0.01) were associated with lower K-RCSQ scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the ICU, physical discomfort, patient care interactions, and feeling unwell were identified as barriers to sleep.</p>","PeriodicalId":44118,"journal":{"name":"Acute and Critical Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2a/fa/acc-2023-00514.PMC10497899.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors influencing sleep quality in the intensive care unit: a descriptive pilot study in Korea.\",\"authors\":\"Yoon Hae Ahn,&nbsp;Hong Yeul Lee,&nbsp;Sang-Min Lee,&nbsp;Jinwoo Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.4266/acc.2023.00514\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As sleep disturbances are common in the intensive care unit (ICU), this study assessed the sleep quality in the ICU and identified barriers to sleep.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients admitted to the ICUs of a tertiary hospital between June 2022 and December 2022 who were not mechanically ventilated at enrollment were included. The quality of sleep (QoS) at home was assessed on a visual analog scale as part of an eight-item survey, while the QoS in the ICU was evaluated using the Korean version of the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (K-RCSQ). Good QoS was defined by a score of ≥50.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 30 patients in the study, 19 reported a QoS score <50. The Spearman correlation coefficient showed no meaningful relationship between the QoS at home and the overall K-RCSQ QoS score in the ICU (r=0.16, P=0.40). The most common barriers to sleep were physical discomfort (43%), being awoken for procedures (43%), and feeling unwell (37%); environmental factors including noise (30%) and light (13%) were also identified sources of sleep disruption. Physical discomfort (median [interquartile range]: 32 [28.0-38.0] vs. 69 [42.0-80.0], P=0.004), being awoken for procedures (36 [20.0-48.0] vs. 54 [36.0-80.0], P=0.04), and feeling unwell (31 [18.0-42.0] vs. 54 [40.0-76.0], P=0.01) were associated with lower K-RCSQ scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the ICU, physical discomfort, patient care interactions, and feeling unwell were identified as barriers to sleep.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acute and Critical Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2a/fa/acc-2023-00514.PMC10497899.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acute and Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4266/acc.2023.00514\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acute and Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4266/acc.2023.00514","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于睡眠障碍在重症监护病房(ICU)很常见,本研究评估了ICU的睡眠质量并确定了睡眠障碍。方法:选取2022年6月~ 2022年12月在某三级医院重症监护室入住的非机械通气患者。作为八项调查的一部分,在家的睡眠质量(QoS)以视觉模拟量表进行评估,而ICU的QoS使用韩国版Richards-Campbell睡眠问卷(K-RCSQ)进行评估。评分≥50分为良好的QoS。结果:在研究的30例患者中,19例报告了QoS评分。结论:在ICU中,身体不适、患者护理互动和感觉不适被确定为睡眠障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Factors influencing sleep quality in the intensive care unit: a descriptive pilot study in Korea.

Background: As sleep disturbances are common in the intensive care unit (ICU), this study assessed the sleep quality in the ICU and identified barriers to sleep.

Methods: Patients admitted to the ICUs of a tertiary hospital between June 2022 and December 2022 who were not mechanically ventilated at enrollment were included. The quality of sleep (QoS) at home was assessed on a visual analog scale as part of an eight-item survey, while the QoS in the ICU was evaluated using the Korean version of the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (K-RCSQ). Good QoS was defined by a score of ≥50.

Results: Of the 30 patients in the study, 19 reported a QoS score <50. The Spearman correlation coefficient showed no meaningful relationship between the QoS at home and the overall K-RCSQ QoS score in the ICU (r=0.16, P=0.40). The most common barriers to sleep were physical discomfort (43%), being awoken for procedures (43%), and feeling unwell (37%); environmental factors including noise (30%) and light (13%) were also identified sources of sleep disruption. Physical discomfort (median [interquartile range]: 32 [28.0-38.0] vs. 69 [42.0-80.0], P=0.004), being awoken for procedures (36 [20.0-48.0] vs. 54 [36.0-80.0], P=0.04), and feeling unwell (31 [18.0-42.0] vs. 54 [40.0-76.0], P=0.01) were associated with lower K-RCSQ scores.

Conclusions: In the ICU, physical discomfort, patient care interactions, and feeling unwell were identified as barriers to sleep.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acute and Critical Care
Acute and Critical Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
87
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
A clinical risk score for predicting acute kidney injury in sepsis patients receiving normal saline in Northern Thailand: a retrospective cohort study. A quasi-experimental study to assess the effect of Benson's relaxation on anxiety and depression among patients with heart failure in Jordan. A study to assess the psychosocial needs of patient family members in the intensive care unit in India. Critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency: latest pathophysiology and management guidelines. Incidence of hypothermia in critically ill patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy in Siriraj Hospital, Thailand.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1