Dataset Information

Sleep Health Promotion Interventions and Their Effectiveness: An Umbrella Review.

ABSTRACT: Sleep is receiving increasing attention in public health. The aim of this umbrella review is to determine what non-pharmacological sleep health interventions have been evaluated among healthy populations, by examining target groups, settings, and effectiveness in improving sleep quality and duration. Comprehensive searches were conducted in five electronic databases (January 1975-February 2019), yielding 6505 records. Thirty-five articles were selected meeting the following eligibility criteria: (1) systematic reviews or meta-analyses of (2) sleep health interventions in (3) primarily healthy populations. Two reviewers independently screened for inclusion, extracted the data, and assessed the review quality. This umbrella review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019126291). Eleven intervention types were defined, and their effectiveness discussed. Substantial evidence demonstrated the effectiveness of later school start times, behavior change methods, and mind-body exercise. Other intervention types, including sleep education or relaxation techniques, demonstrated some promising impacts on sleep, but with less consistent evidence. Results were limited by high heterogeneity between studies, mixed results, and variable review quality. Nevertheless, this umbrella review is a first step towards understanding the current state of sleep health promotion and gives an overview of interventions across the lifespan.

SUBMITTER: Albakri U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8196727 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Prior research has investigated various strategies to improve health, wellbeing and the job-related outcomes of nurses. However, the scope of this evidence is not clear and the types of intervention most likely to have positive outcomes are unknown. OBJECTIVE:To provide an overview and synthesis of the effectiveness of interventions conducted with the goal of improving health, wellbeing and the job-related outcomes of nurses. METHODS:A systematic database search was conducted from January 2000 to December 2018, with pre-defined criteria (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE and PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; PsycINFO; and BioMed Central). In total, 136 intervention studies with a total sample of 16,129 participants (range 9-3381) were included and evaluated. Data extraction, quality assessment and risk of bias analyses were performed. RESULTS:Studies included randomised controlled trials (RCTs; n = 52, 38%), randomised crossover design studies (n = 2, 1.5%) and non-randomised pre-post studies with a control group (n = 31, 23%) and without a control group (n = 51, 37.5%). The majority of interventions focused on education, physical activity, mindfulness, or relaxation. Thirty-seven (27%) studies had a multimodal intervention approach. On average, studies had relatively small samples (median = 61; mode = 30) and were conducted predominantly in North America (USA/Canada, n = 53). The findings were mixed overall, with some studies reporting benefits and others finding no effects. Dietary habits was the most successfully improved outcome (8/9), followed by indices of body composition (20/24), physical activity (PA) (11/14), and stress (49/66), with >70% of relevant studies in each of these categories reporting improvements. The lowest success rate was for work-related outcomes (16/32). Separate analysis of RCTs indicated that interventions that focus solely on education might be less likely to result in positive outcomes than interventions targeting behavioural change. CONCLUSIONS:Interventions targeting diet, body composition, PA, or stress are most likely to have positive outcomes for nurses' health and/or wellbeing. The methodologically strongest evidence (RCTs) is available for body composition and stress. Interventions relying solely on educational approaches are least likely to be effective. Organisational outcomes appear to be more challenging to change with lifestyle intervention, likely requiring more complex solutions including changes to the work environment. There is a need for more high-quality evidence since many studies had moderate or high risk of bias and low reporting quality.

Project description:BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Pain influences sleep and vice versa. We performed an umbrella review of meta-analyses on treatments for diverse conditions in order to examine whether diverse medical treatments for different conditions have similar or divergent effects on pain and sleep. METHODS: We searched published systematic reviews with meta-analyses in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews until October 20, 2011. We identified randomized trials (or meta-analyses thereof, when >1 trial was available) where both pain and sleep outcomes were examined. Pain outcomes were categorized as headache, musculoskeletal, abdominal, pelvic, generic or other pain. Sleep outcomes included insomnia, sleep disruption, and sleep disturbance. We estimated odds ratios for all outcomes and evaluated the concordance in the direction of effects between sleep and various types of pain and the correlation of treatment effects between sleep and pain outcomes. RESULTS: 151 comparisons with 385 different trials met our eligibility criteria. 96 comparisons had concordant direction of effects between each pain outcome and sleep, while in 55 the effect estimates were in opposite directions (P<0.0001). In the 20 comparisons with largest amount of evidence, the experimental drug always had worse sleep outcomes and tended to have worse pain outcomes in 17/20 cases. For headache and musculoskeletal pain, 69 comparisons showed concordant direction of effects with sleep outcomes and 36 showed discordant direction (P<0.0001). For the other 4 pain types there were overall 27 vs. 19 pairs with concordant vs. discordant direction of effects (P?=?0.095). There was a weak correlation of the treatment effect sizes for sleep vs. headache/musculoskeletal pain (r?=?0.17, P?=?0.092). CONCLUSIONS: Medical interventions tend to have effects in the same direction for pain and sleep outcomes, but exceptions occur. Concordance is primarily seen for sleep and headache or musculoskeletal pain where many drugs may both disturb sleep and cause pain.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Garden-based interventions show promise for improving not only child nutrition, but other indicators of child health. Yet, existing systematic reviews of garden-based interventions often focus on one particular health outcome or setting, creating a need to holistically summarize review-level evidence on the role of garden-based interventions in early childhood. To fill this gap, we performed an umbrella review of garden-based interventions to examine their role in early childhood health promotion for children ages 6?years and younger, examining effective components of garden-based interventions and critically evaluating existing evidence. METHODS:We searched the following databases: PubMed, PubMed, PsycINFO, ERIC, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, OVID-Agricola, and CAB Direct, limiting to reviews published from 1990 to August 2019. Of the 9457 references identified, we included a total of 16 unique reviews for analysis. RESULTS:Across reviews, garden based-interventions were most effective at improving nutrition-related outcomes for children, including nutritional status and fruit and vegetable consumption. Few reviews examined child health outcomes of garden-based interventions that were not nutrition related, such as physical activity, or academic performance. Across settings, there was the most evidence in support of garden-based interventions conducted in home gardens, compared to evidence from early care and education or community settings. We were unable to report on most effective components of garden-based interventions due to limitations of included reviews. CONCLUSIONS:Existing evidence is difficult to interpret due to methodological limitations at both the review and primary study level. Therefore, the lack of evidence for certain child health outcomes should not necessarily be interpreted as an absence of an effect of garden-based interventions for specific outcomes, but as a product of these limitations. Given the breadth of evidence for garden-based interventions to improve a number of dimensions of health with older children and adult populations, we highlight areas of future research to address evidence gaps identified in this umbrella review. Further research on the role of garden-based interventions, including their impact on non-nutrition early childhood health outcomes and how effectiveness differs by setting type is necessary to fully understand their role in early childhood health promotion. PROSPERO REGISTRATION:CRD42019106848 .

Project description:BackgroundThe prevention of mental disorders and promotion of mental health and well-being are growing fields. Whether mental health promotion and prevention interventions provide value for money in children, adolescents, adults, and older adults is unclear. The aim of the current study is to update 2 existing reviews of cost-effectiveness studies in this field in order to determine whether such interventions are cost-effective.Methods and findingsElectronic databases (including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EconLit through EBSCO and Embase) were searched for published cost-effectiveness studies of prevention of mental disorders and promotion of mental health and well-being from 2008 to 2020. The quality of studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies Instrument (QHES). The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (# CRD42019127778). The primary outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) or return on investment (ROI) ratio across all studies. A total of 65 studies met the inclusion criteria of a full economic evaluation, of which, 23 targeted children and adolescents, 35 targeted adults, while the remaining targeted older adults. A large number of studies focused on prevention of depression and/or anxiety disorders, followed by promotion of mental health and well-being and other mental disorders. Although there was high heterogeneity in terms of the design among included economic evaluations, most studies consistently found that interventions for mental health prevention and promotion were cost-effective or cost saving. The review found that targeted prevention was likely to be cost-effective compared to universal prevention. Screening plus psychological interventions (e.g., cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT]) at school were the most cost-effective interventions for prevention of mental disorders in children and adolescents, while parenting interventions and workplace interventions had good evidence in mental health promotion. There is inconclusive evidence for preventive interventions for mental disorders or mental health promotion in older adults. While studies were of general high quality, there was limited evidence available from low- and middle-income countries. The review was limited to studies where mental health was the primary outcome and may have missed general health promoting strategies that could also prevent mental disorder or promote mental health. Some ROI studies might not be included given that these studies are commonly published in grey literature rather than in the academic literature.ConclusionsOur review found a significant growth of economic evaluations in prevention of mental disorders or promotion of mental health and well-being over the last 10 years. Although several interventions for mental health prevention and promotion provide good value for money, the varied quality as well as methodologies used in economic evaluations limit the generalisability of conclusions about cost-effectiveness. However, the finding that the majority of studies especially in children, adolescents, and adults demonstrated good value for money is promising. Research on cost-effectiveness in low-middle income settings is required.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42019127778.

Project description:IntroductionInformal (unpaid) caregivers play an essential role in caring for older people, whose care needs are often not fully met by formal services. While providing informal care may be a positive experience, it can also exert a considerable strain on caregivers' physical and mental health. How to best support the needs of informal caregivers remains largely debated. This umbrella review (review of systematic reviews) aims to evaluate (1) whether effective interventions can mitigate the negative health outcomes of informal caregiving, (2) whether certain types of interventions are more effective than others, (3) whether effectiveness of interventions depends on caregiver/receiver, context or implementation characteristics and (4) how these interventions are perceived in terms of acceptability, feasibility and added value.Methods and analysisWe will include systematic reviews of primary studies focusing on the effectiveness of interventions (public or private, unifaceted or multifaceted, delivered by health or social care professionals or volunteers) aimed at reducing the impact of caregiving on caregivers' physical or mental health. This will also include quantitative and qualitative syntheses of implementation studies. The literature search will include the following databases: Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science. A key informant-guided search of grey literature will be performed. Quality appraisal will be conducted with the AMSTAR-2 checklist for quantitative reviews and with an ad hoc checklist for qualitative syntheses. Narrative and tabular summaries of extracted data will be produced, and framework synthesis will be employed for weaving together evidence from quantitative studies in effectiveness reviews with findings on implementation from qualitative studies.Ethics and disseminationThis umbrella review will use data from secondary sources and will not involve interactions with study participants; it is thus exempt from ethical approval. Results will be presented at international conferences and will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42021252841.

Project description:BackgroundThe overarching objective was to examine the effectiveness of intervention strategies to promote fruit and vegetable consumption. To do this, systematic review evidence regarding the effects of intervention strategies was synthesized; organized, where appropriate, by the setting in which the strategies were implemented. Additionally, we sought to describe gaps in the review of evidence; that is, where evidence regarding the effectiveness of recommended policy actions had not been systematically synthesised.MethodsWe undertook a systematic search of electronic databases and the grey literature to identify systematic reviews describing the effects of any intervention strategy targeting fruit and/or vegetable intake in children or adults of any age.ResultsThe effects of 32 intervention strategies were synthesised from the 19 included reviews. The strategies were mapped across all three broad domains of the NOURISHING framework (i.e. food environment, food system and behaviour change communication), but covered just 14 of the framework's 65 sub-policy areas. There was evidence supporting the effectiveness of 19 of the 32 intervention strategies. The findings of the umbrella review suggest that intervention strategies implemented within schools, childcare services, homes, workplaces and primary care can be effective, as can eHealth strategies, mass media campaigns, household food production strategies and fiscal interventions.ConclusionsA range of effective strategy options are available for policy makers and practitioners interested in improving fruit and/or vegetable intake. However, the effects of many strategies - particularly those targeting agricultural production practices, the supply chain and the broader food system - have not been reported in systematic reviews. Primary studies assessing the effects of these strategies, and the inclusion of such studies in systematic reviews, are needed to better inform national and international efforts to improve public health nutrition.Trial registrationThe review protocol was deposited in a publicly available Open Science framework prior to execution of the search strategy. https://osf.io/unj7x/.

Project description:IntroductionPreventing falls is a priority for aged care providers. Research to date has focused on fall prevention strategies in single settings (e.g., residential aged care (RAC) or community settings). However, some aged care providers deliver care, including fall prevention interventions, across RAC and community settings. We conducted an umbrella review to identify what type of fall prevention interventions had the greatest impact on falls outcomes in RAC and community settings.MethodsFive databases were searched for systematic reviews of falls prevention randomised control trials in older adults living in the community or RAC. Data extracted included systematic review methods, population characteristics, intervention characteristics, setting details (RAC or community), and fall-related outcomes (falls, people who have had a fall, fall-related hospitalisations, and fall-related fractures). Review quality was appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews-2 tool.ResultsOne-hundred and six systematic reviews were included; 63 and 19 of these stratified results by community and RAC settings respectively, the remainder looked at both settings. The most common intervention types discussed in reviews included 'exercise' (61%, n = 65), 'multifactorial' (two or more intervention types delivered together) (26%, n = 28), and 'vitamin D' (18%, n = 19). In RAC and community settings, 'exercise' interventions demonstrated the most consistent reduction in falls and people who have had a fall compared to other intervention types. 'Multifactorial' interventions were also beneficial in both settings however demonstrated more consistent reduction in falls and people who fall in RAC settings compared to community settings. 'Vitamin D' interventions may be beneficial in community-dwelling populations but not in RAC settings. It was not possible to stratify fall-related hospitalisation and fall-related fracture outcomes by setting due to limited number of RAC-specific reviews (n = 3 and 0 respectively).Conclusion'Exercise' interventions may be the most appropriate falls prevention intervention for older adults in RAC and community settings as it is beneficial for multiple fall-related outcomes (falls, fall-related fractures, and people who have had a fall). Augmenting 'exercise' interventions to become 'multifactorial' interventions may also improve the incidence of falls in both settings.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Garden-based interventions have the potential to impact young children's health in a number of ways, including enhancing dietary intake, increasing outdoor physical activity, diversifying the gut microbiome, and promoting general wellbeing. A number of recent systematic reviews have either included or focused on garden-based interventions for young children. However, most prior reviews including young children only focus on one health outcome or one setting, making a full summary of prior research assessing the impact of garden-based interventions nonexistent. As such, this umbrella systematic review aims to synthesize the literature on health outcomes of garden-based interventions for young children. METHODS:This protocol outlines the systematic steps we will take to conduct an umbrella review on health-related outcomes of garden-based interventions in children younger than 6?years of age. We will systematically search PubMed, PsycINFO, ERIC, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, OVID-Agricola, and CAB Direct, including all systematic reviews and meta-analyses fitting the pre-determined inclusion/exclusion criteria. We will double screen at each phase of the review: title/abstract, full text, data extraction, and quality appraisal. We will assess the quality of included reviews using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). Based on the potential for stark variability in what how reviews report child health outcomes, we will analyze the reviews both narratively and quantitatively, reporting summary of findings tables and iteratively mapping the results. This protocol aligns with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols statement (PRISMA-P). DISCUSSION:This umbrella review aims to summarize the role that garden-based interventions play in health promotion for young children. We will focus on a number of diverse child health outcomes in an effort to comprehensively synthesize the evidence to inform future garden-based interventions, research, and policy. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42019106848.

Project description:BACKGROUND:This systematic review provides a narrative synthesis of the evidence on the effectiveness of mental health promotion interventions for young people in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Commissioned by the WHO, a review of the evidence for mental health promotion interventions across the lifespan from early years to adulthood was conducted. This paper reports on the findings for interventions promoting the positive mental health of young people (aged 6-18 years) in school and community-based settings. METHODS:Searching a range of electronic databases, 22 studies employing RCTs (N = 11) and quasi-experimental designs conducted in LMICs since 2000 were identified. Fourteen studies of school-based interventions implemented in eight LMICs were reviewed; seven of which included interventions for children living in areas of armed conflict and six interventions of multicomponent lifeskills and resilience training. Eight studies evaluating out-of-school community interventions for adolescents were identified in five countries. Using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) criteria, two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the evidence. RESULTS:The findings from the majority of the school-based interventions are strong. Structured universal interventions for children living in conflict areas indicate generally significant positive effects on students' emotional and behavioural wellbeing, including improved self-esteem and coping skills. However, mixed results were also reported, including differential effects for gender and age groups, and two studies reported nonsignficant findings. The majority of the school-based lifeskills and resilience programmes received a moderate quality rating, with findings indicating positive effects on students' self-esteem, motivation and self-efficacy. The quality of evidence from the community-based interventions for adolescents was moderate to strong with promising findings concerning the potential of multicomponent interventions to impact on youth mental health and social wellbeing. CONCLUSIONS:The review findings indicate that interventions promoting the mental health of young people can be implemented effectively in LMIC school and community settings with moderate to strong evidence of their impact on both positive and negative mental health outcomes. There is a paucity of evidence relating to interventions for younger children in LMIC primary schools. Evidence for the scaling up and sustainability of mental health promotion interventions in LMICs needs to be strengthened.

Dataset Information

Sleep Health Promotion Interventions and Their Effectiveness: An Umbrella Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets