4.6 Article

Aerobic exercise improves self-reported sleep and quality of life in older adults with insomnia

Journal

SLEEP MEDICINE
Volume 11, Issue 9, Pages 934-940

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2010.04.014

Keywords

Sleep; Physical activity; Quality of life; Depression; Insomnia; Aging

Funding

  1. National Institute of Aging [P01 AG11412]
  2. General Clinical Research Center [M01 RR00048, K23 HL091508, T32AG020506]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To assess the efficacy of moderate aerobic physical activity with sleep hygiene education to improve sleep, mood and quality of life in older adults with chronic insomnia. Methods: Seventeen sedentary adults aged >= 55 years with insomnia (mean age 61.6 [SD +/- 4.3] years; 16 female) participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing 16 weeks of aerobic physical activity plus sleep hygiene to non-physical activity plus sleep hygiene. Eligibility included primary insomnia for at least 3 months, habitual sleep duration <6.5 h and a Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score >5. Outcomes included sleep quality, mood and quality of life questionnaires (PSQI, Epworth Sleepiness Scale [ESS], Short-form 36 [SF-36], Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale [CES-D]). Results: The physical activity group improved in sleep quality on the global PSQI (p < .0001), sleep latency (p = .049), sleep duration (p = .04), daytime dysfunction (p = .027), and sleep efficiency (p = .036) PSQI sub-scores compared to the control group. The physical activity group also had reductions in depressive symptoms (p = .044), daytime sleepiness (p = .02) and improvements in vitality (p = .017) compared to baseline scores. Conclusion: Aerobic physical activity with sleep hygiene education is an effective treatment approach to improve sleep quality, mood and quality of life in older adults with chronic insomnia. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available