4.4 Article

Psychological morbidity, illness representations, and quality of life in female and male patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome

Journal

PSYCHOLOGY HEALTH & MEDICINE
Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages 136-149

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13548506.2011.579986

Keywords

obstructive sleep apnea syndrome; anxiety; depression; illness representations; quality of life

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is a sleep-related breathing disorder that affects both women and men. The aim of this study was to characterize and investigate the differences in terms of anxiety, depression, illness perception, and quality of life between female and male OSAS patients from a total of 111 patients (33 women and 78 men) who were recently diagnosed with OSAS in an outpatient clinic of a University Hospital in Portugal. They underwent a standardized protocol that included evaluation to assess of psychological morbidity (anxiety and depression-Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), illness representations (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), and quality of life (Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index). The most significant differences between female and male OSAS patients result of apnea/hypopnea index (AHI), after controlling for body mass index (p < 0.05); anxiety (p = 0.000) and depression (p < 0.005); consequences (p < 0.005), identity (p = 0.000), coherence (p < 0.01), and emotional representation (p < 0.005) of OSAS; and for daily functioning (p = 0.000), emotional (p = 0.001), and symptoms (p < 0.05) domains of quality of life. Data suggest that women revealed more psychological morbidity associated with OSAS. Therefore, it seems extremely important to look at women as potential patients for sleep apnea and avoid looking up for a pattern of symptoms that rely on men as a norm to which women are compared.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available