Dataset Information

The Nightmare Disorder Index: development and initial validation in a sample of nurses.

ABSTRACT:

Study objectives

Nurses are a group at high risk for nightmares, yet little is known about the rate of nightmare disorder and associated psychosocial factors in this group in part attributable to the lack of a self-report questionnaire to assess DSM-5 criteria for nightmare disorder. Aims of the current study were to (1) report on development and initial validity of a self-report measure of DSM-5 nightmare disorder, and (2) examine the rate and associated factors of nightmare disorder among nurses.

Methods

Nurses (N = 460) completed baseline measures online including Nightmare Disorder Index (NDI), psychosocial and demographic questionnaires. A subset (n = 400) completed 14 days of sleep diaries and actigraphy.

Results

NDI demonstrated satisfactory psychometric characteristics as indicated by good internal consistency (α = 0.80), medium inter-item correlations (r = 0.50), medium to large item-total (r = 0.55-0.85) and convergent correlations (0.32-0.45), and small to medium discriminant correlations (-0.12-0.33). Per NDI, 48.7% of nurses reported no nightmares in the past month, 43.9% met partial/subthreshold criteria and 7.4% met full criteria for probable nightmare disorder. Nurses with nightmare disorder demonstrated significantly poorer psychosocial functioning (i.e. posttraumatic stress, depression, anxiety, stress) than those with subthreshold nightmare symptoms, who had poorer functioning than those with no nightmares.

Conclusions

NDI is an efficient and valid self-report assessment of nightmare disorder. Nurses have high rates of nightmares and nightmare disorder which are associated with poorer psychosocial functioning. We recommend increased nightmare screening particularly for high-risk populations such as healthcare workers.

SUBMITTER: Dietch JR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8521749 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Growing consensus suggests that frailty-associated risks should inform shared surgical decision making. However, it is not clear how best to screen for frailty in preoperative surgical populations. Objective:To develop and validate the Risk Analysis Index (RAI), a 14-item instrument used to measure surgical frailty. It can be calculated prospectively (RAI-C), using a clinical questionnaire, or retrospectively (RAI-A), using variables from the surgical quality improvement databases (Veterans Affairs or American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Projects). Design, Setting, and Participants:Single-site, prospective cohort from July 2011 to September 2015 at the Veterans Affairs Nebraska-Western Iowa Heath Care System, a Level 1b Veterans Affairs Medical Center. The study included all patients presenting to the medical center for elective surgery. Exposures:We assessed the RAI-C for all patients scheduled for surgery, linking these scores to administrative and quality improvement data to calculate the RAI-A and the modified Frailty Index. Main Outcomes and Measures:Receiver operator characteristics and C statistics for each measure predicting postoperative mortality and morbidity. Results:Of the participants, the mean (SD) age was 60.7 (13.9) years and 249 participants (3.6%) were women. We assessed the RAI-C 10?698 times, from which we linked 6856 unique patients to mortality data. The C statistic predicting 180-day mortality for the RAI-C was 0.772. Of these 6856 unique patients, we linked 2785 to local Veterans Affairs Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Projects data and calculated the C statistic for both the RAI-A (0.823) and RAI-C (0.824), along with the correlation between the 2 scores (r?=?0.478; P?<?.001). Of these 2785 patients, there were sufficient data to calculate the modified Frailty Index for 1021, in which the C statistics were 0.865 (RAI-A), 0.797 (RAI-C), and 0.811 (modified Frailty Index). The correlation between the RAI-A and RAI-C was 0.547, and the correlations of the modified Frailty Index to the RAI-A and RAI-C were 0.301 and 0.269, respectively (all P?<?.001). A cutoff of RAI-C of at least 21 classified 18.3% patients as "frail" with a sensitivity of 0.50 and specificity of 0.82, whereas the RAI-A was less sensitive (0.25) and more specific (0.97), classifying only 3.7% as "frail." Conclusions and Relevance:The RAI-C and RAI-A represent effective tools for measuring frailty in surgical populations with predictive ability on par with other frailty tools. Moderate correlation between the measures suggests convergent validity. The RAI-C offers the advantage of prospective, preoperative assessment that is proved feasible for large-scale screening in clinical practice. However, further efforts should be directed at determining the optimal components of preoperative frailty assessment.

Project description:Findings from studies investigating cognitive flexibility in eating disorders (EDs) are inconsistent, and although neuropsychological tests are commonly used to measure these skills, they may not be particularly effective in predicting everyday functioning. Also, extant studies have largely focused on flexibility in anorexia nervosa (AN), with assessments targeting general rather than specific flexibility, and cognitive, rather than behavioral flexibility. Knowledge regarding ED specific flexibility and flexibility in bulimia nervosa (BN) and binge eating disorder (BED) is still scarce. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a novel measure assessing general and ED specific flexibility in a diagnostically diverse sample, and in healthy controls (HCs). A sample of 207 adult individuals with EDs (55% AN, 29% BN, 16% BED) and 288 HCs responded to an online, 51-item, pilot questionnaire on ED specific and general flexibility. In addition, participants completed the shift subscale from the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function Adult version (BRIEF-A), and the Eating Disorder Diagnostic Scale (EDDS). A principal component analysis (PCA) in the clinical sample yielded a 36-item, three-factor solution capturing general flexibility, flexibility related to food and exercise, and flexibility concerning body shape and weight. Results showed that the measure had good to excellent internal consistency, and good convergent validity. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using data from HCs revealed good fit indexes, supporting the original factor solution. A receiver operating characteristics analysis (ROC) demonstrated excellent accuracy in distinguishing scores from those with and without EDs. A cutoff score of 136 yielded the most balanced sensitivity and specificity. Significant differences in general and ED specific flexibility were found between individuals with and without EDs. Overall, HCs achieved the highest flexibility scores, followed by those with BED, BN, and AN. In sum this novel measure, the Eating Disorder Flexibility Index (EDFLIX) questionnaire, was found to be reliable and valid in the assessment of cognitive and behavioral flexibility, with results offering support for the conceptual distinction between general and ED related flexibility. The study also provides strong evidence for the discriminant validity of the EDFLIX with results revealing significant differences in flexibility in people with and without EDs. In addition, significant differences in flexibility also emerged when comparing diagnostic groups, indicating the utility of the assessment instrument for classification purposes.

Project description:Background:The aim of this paper was to provide an initial validation of a newly developed parent questionnaire-the Stanford Social Dimensions Scale (SSDS), designed to capture individual differences across several key social dimensions including social motivation in children and adolescents with and without psychiatric disorders. Methods:The initial validation sample was comprised of parents of 175 individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (35 females, 140 males; M age = 7.19?years, SD age = 3.96) and the replication sample consisted of 624 parents of children who were either typically developing or presented with a range of neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric disorders (302 females, 322 males; M age = 11.49?years, SDage = 4.48). Parents from both samples completed the SSDS and the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS-2). Results:Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling indicated that a 5-factor model provided adequate to excellent fit to the data in the initial ASD sample (comparative fit index [CFI] = .940, Tucker-Lewis Index [TLI] = .919, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = .048, standardized root mean square residual [SRMR] = .038). The identified factors were interpreted as Social Motivation, Social Affiliation, Expressive Social Communication, Social Recognition, and Unusual Approach. This factor structure was further confirmed in Sample 2 (CFI = 946, TLI = .930, RMSEA = .044, SRMR = .026). Internal consistency for all subscales was in the good to excellent range across both samples as indicated by Composite Reliability scores of ??.72. Convergent and divergent validity was strong as indexed by the pattern of correlations with relevant SRS-2 and Child Behavior Checklist domains and with verbal and non-verbal intellectual functioning scores in Sample 1 and with the Need to Belong Scale and Child Social Preference Scale scores in Sample 2. Across both samples, females had higher social motivation and expressive social communication scores. Discriminant validity was strong given that across all SSDS subscales, the ASD sample had significantly higher impairment than both the typically developing group and the group with other clinical conditions, which in turn, had significantly higher impairment than the typically developing group. Conclusions:Our findings provide initial validation of a new scale designed to comprehensively capture individual differences in social motivation and other key social dimensions in ASD.

Project description:BackgroundThe Movement Disorder Society-sponsored Nonmotor Rating Scale is an update of the existing Parkinson's disease Nonmotor Symptoms Scale modified to address some limitations in Nonmotor Symptoms Scale scoring, structure, and symptom coverage.MethodsPD patients were recruited from movement disorder centers in an international, multicenter study. The Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale, consisting of 13 domains plus a subscale for nonmotor fluctuations, was rater administered, along with the Nonmotor Symptoms Scale and other clinical assessments. Standard reliability and validity testing were conducted.ResultsFour hundred and two PD patients were recruited (mean age?±?standard deviation, 67.42?±?9.96 years; mean age at PD onset ± standard deviation, 59.27?±?10.67?years; median Hoehn and Yahr stage 2 (interquartile range 2-3). Data quality was satisfactory for all Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale domains except sexual (6.7% missing data). There were no floor or ceiling effects for the Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale and nonmotor fluctuations total score; domains had no ceiling effects, but some floor effects (13.5%-83.5%). The Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale and nonmotor fluctuations total score internal consistency were acceptable (average Cronbach's alpha, 0.66 and 0.84, respectively); interrater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, >0.95); for test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.84 for the Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale and 0.70 for Movement Disorder Society nonmotor fluctuations total score, and precision was excellent for the Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale (standard error of measurement, 25.30) and fair for nonmotor fluctuations (standard error of measurement, 7.06). Correlations between Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale score and the corresponding Nonmotor Symptoms Scale and Movement Disorder Society UPDRS scores were high. There were no significant sex or age effects. The Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale score increased with increasing PD duration, disease severity, and PD medication dose (all P?<?0.001).ConclusionsThe Movement Disorder Society Nonmotor Rating Scale is a valid measure for measuring the burden of a wide range of Nonmotor Rating Scale scores, including nonmotor fluctuations, in PD patients. © 2019 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.