Dataset Information

ICU Patients' Perception of Sleep and Modifiable versus Non-Modifiable Factors That Affect It: A Prospective Observational Study.

ABSTRACT: Background: Good sleep quantity and quality are essential for patient recovery while in the intensive care unit (ICU). Patients commonly report poor sleep while in the ICU, and therefore, identifying the modifiable factors that patients perceive as impacting their sleep is important to improve sleep and recovery. This study also assessed night-time light and sound levels in an ICU in an effort to find modifiable factors. Methods: A total of 137 patients (51F) aged 58.1 ± 16.8 years completed a survey including questions about their sleep before and during their ICU stay, factors contributing to poor sleep in the ICU, and perceived factors that may have improved their sleep in the ICU. Night-time light and sound levels were measured in patient rooms and nurses' stations. Results: Patients reported poorer sleep quantity and quality while in the ICU compared to home. Among the most common reasons for poor sleep, easily modifiable factors included noise (50.4%) and lights (45.3%), potentially modifiable factors included pain (46.7%), and non-modifiable factors included IV lines (42.3%). Patients felt their sleep would have been improved with interventions such as dimming lights (58.4%) and closing doors/blinds at night (42.3%), as well as potentially implementable interventions such as a sleeping pill (51.8%). Overnight sound levels in bedrooms were above the recommended levels (40 dB) and light levels averaged over 100 lux. Conclusions: Sleep quality and quantity were both worse in ICU than at home. Modifiable factors such as sound and light are common factors that patients perceive impact their sleep in the ICU. Readily implementable sleep management strategies aimed at minimizing the impacts of sound and light levels in the ICU are ways to improve patients' sleep in the ICU.

SUBMITTER: Martinez FE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9267898 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVaccines against COVID-19 show high efficacy, yet, infection is still being detected among immunized patients, although with blunted severity. The purpose of this study was to assess the severity of COVID-19 infection among immunized versus non-immunized COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU.MethodA prospective observational cohort study, including all COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care unit between January 1st, 2021 and June 30th, 2021 were eligible for inclusion. A comparison of severity upon hospitalization of immunized versus non-immunized patients on a 7-level ordinal scale was conducted, using ordinal logistic regression.Results592 patients were enrolled, 524 (88.5%) non-immunized, 63 (10.6%) partially immunized, and 5 (0.9%) fully immunized, partially and fully immunized patients were grouped together. Majority of immunized patients (86.7%) were symptomatic before 21 days of immunization. Non-immunized group had fewer patients in the lower severity categories, while more patients in the higher severity categories compared to immunized group. At least one dose of immunization was associated with reduction of odds of moving up severity scale (OR = 0.2 [95% CI: 0.15-0.4]; p < 0.001) in a well fitted ordinal logistic regression model. At least one dose of immunization was associated with lower adjusted odds of 30 day all-cause mortality (OR = 0.45 [95% CI: 0.23-0.89]; p = 0.02). Non-immunized group had higher mortality rate (43.9% versus 29.4% [95% CI: 1.5 to 25.8]; p = 0.02).ConclusionMost COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU were non-immunized, most of the partially immunized patients got infected before immunity could develop, and fully immunized patients were likely non-responders. At least one dose of immunization significantly decreases severity of the disease across all ordinal severity categories, and is significantly associated with lower 30 day all-cause mortality. Accordingly, immunization status may have to be considered when deciding on disposition of COVID-19 patients at the point of triage.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough several cardiovascular, demographic, genetic and lifestyle factors have been associated with cognitive function, little is known about what type of cognitive impairment they are associated with. The aim was to examine the associations between different risk factors and future memory and attention/executive functions, and their interaction with APOE genotype.MethodsParticipants from a large, prospective, population-based, Swedish study were included (n = 3,229). Linear regression models were used to examine baseline hypertension, body mass index (BMI), long-term glucose levels (HbA1c), different lipid levels, physical activity, alcohol consumption, smoking, education, APOE genotype, age and sex. All models were adjusted for follow-up time and basic demographics, and, in a second step, all significant predictors were included to examine independent effects. Follow-up outcomes were memory and attention/executive functions.ResultsThe mean age at baseline was 56.1 (SD 5.7) years and 59.7% were women. The mean follow-up time was 17.4 (range 14.3-20.8) years. When examining independent effects, APOE ε4 genotype(p < 0.01), and higher HbA1c(p < 0.001), were associated with future low memory function. Higher BMI (p < 0.05), and HbA1c(p < 0.05), lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)(p < 0.05)and stroke(p < 0.001) were associated with future low attention/executive function. The strongest factors associated with both better memory and attention/executive functions were higher education and alcohol consumption. Further, significant interaction effects between predictors and APOE genotype were found. For memory function, the protective effects of education were greater among ɛ4-carriers(p < 0.05). For attention/executive function, the protective effects of alcohol were greater among ɛ2 or ɛ4-carriers(p < 0.05). Also, attention/executive function was lower among ɛ4-carriers with higher BMI(p < 0.05) and ɛ2-carriers with higher HbA1c-levels(p < 0.05).ConclusionsTargeting cardiovascular risk factors in mid-life could have greater effect on future attention/executive functions rather than memory, whereas targeting diabetes could be beneficial for multiple cognitive domains. In addition, effects of different risk factors may vary depending on the APOE genotype. The varied cognitive profiles suggest that different mechanisms and brain regions are affected by the individual risk factors. Having detailed knowledge about the specific cognitive effects of different risk factors might be beneficial in preventive health counseling.

Project description:IntroductionIntracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is commonly used in neurocritical care patients with acute brain injury (ABI). Practice about indications and use of ICP monitoring in patients with ABI remains, however, highly variable in high-income countries, while data on ICP monitoring in low and middle-income countries are scarce or inconsistent. The aim of the SYNAPSE-ICU study is to describe current practices of ICP monitoring using a worldwide sample and to quantify practice variations in ICP monitoring and management in neurocritical care ABI patients.Methods and analysisThe SYNAPSE-ICU study is a large international, prospective, observational cohort study. From March 2018 to March 2019, all patients fulfilling the following inclusion criteria will be recruited: age >18 years; diagnosis of ABI due to primary haemorrhagic stroke (subarachnoid haemorrhage or intracranial haemorrhage) or traumatic brain injury; Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) with no eye opening (Eyes response=1) and Motor score ≤5 (not following commands) at ICU admission, or neuro-worsening within the first 48 hours with no eye opening and a Motor score decreased to ≤5. Data related to clinical examination (GCS, pupil size and reactivity, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score, neuroimaging) and to ICP interventions (Therapy Intensity Levels) will be recorded on admission, and at day 1, 3 and 7. The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) will be collected at discharge from ICU and from hospital and at 6-month follow-up. The impact of ICP monitoring and ICP-driven therapy on GOSE will be analysed at both patient and ICU level.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Ethics Committee 'Brianza' at the Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale (ASST)-Monza (approval date: 21 November 2017). Each National Coordinator will notify the relevant ethics committee, in compliance with the local legislation and rules. Data will be made available to the scientific community by means of abstracts submitted to the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine annual conference and by scientific reports and original articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03257904.

Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial resistance is a worldwide challenge for health services and systems alike. To reduce the overuse of antibiotics, multifaceted interventions are often used to achieve sustainable effects. It can be assumed that these effects are influenced by contextual factors. Embedded in the cluster randomized trial ARena (Sustainable reduction of antibiotic-induced antimicrobial resistance), the aim of this present study was to identify contextual factors associated with practitioners' perceptions of antibiotic prescribing in German primary health care.MethodsIn a prospective observational study, data were generated in a three-wave survey study between January 2018 and July 2019. Analysis was performed using logistic regression models. The outcome of interest was the physician perceived impact of participating in the ARena project on decision-making regarding antibiotic prescribing, the independent variables of interest included individual characteristics, intervention arm allocation, primary care network (PCN) environment and characteristics of the medical practice.ResultsForty Six point eight percent (n = 126) of participants indicated to have perceived an impact on their decision-making regarding antibiotic prescribing by participating in the ARena project. Bivariate logistic regression analyses indicated that work experience (odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.006-1.103), PCN environment (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.256-3.363), structural conditions (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.161-2.371), environment of existing processes (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.011-2.094), and externally defined general conditions (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.035-2.378) were associated with physicians' perceived impact of participating in the ARena project on decision-making regarding antibiotic prescribing. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, only work experience OR 1.05 (95% CI 1.001-1.104) continuously showed a significant influence.ConclusionsThis study indicates that contextual factors at individual, practice, and system level influence physicians' perceptions of antibiotic prescribing. Longer work experience appeared to be a significant influencing factor to be considered in antimicrobial stewardship programs.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN58150046 (registered 13.09.2017).

Dataset Information

ICU Patients' Perception of Sleep and Modifiable versus Non-Modifiable Factors That Affect It: A Prospective Observational Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets