4.6 Article

Daytime sleepiness in mild Alzheimer's disease with and without parkinsonian features

Journal

SLEEP MEDICINE
Volume 12, Issue 4, Pages 397-402

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2010.09.006

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; Parkinsonian features; Excessive daytime sleepiness; Multiple sleep latency test; Polysomnography; Sleep

Funding

  1. American Sleep Medicine Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and nocturnal sleep disruption are common in Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, little is known regarding risk factors for developing EDS and sleep disruption in AD. In AD, EDS is associated with parkinsonian motor features (PF), which are associated with faster cognitive decline. The primary aim of this exploratory study was to evaluate whether differences in EDS and nocturnal sleep disruption exist between AD participants with versus without PF. Methods: Thirty-six participants with mild AD were evaluated for PF using the modified motor UPDRS (mmUPDRS) scoring system and classified according to absence (AD-PF, n = 19) or presence (AD + PF, n = 17) of PF. EDS was assessed using questionnaires and a multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) performed the day after nocturnal polysomnogram. Participants were considered Sleepy or Not Sleepy according to mean MSLT scores (cutoff score = 10.4 min). Results: Results showed that the AD + PF group were sleepier than the AD-PF group by subjective and objective measures, despite similarities in nocturnal sleep. The AD + PF group had higher scores on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (8.5 versus 3.9, p = .001). The AD + PF group also had higher percentage of participants that had Sleepy MSLT scores compared to the AD-PF group (75% versus 31.6%, respectively; chi(2) = 6.56, p = .01). Conclusions: The presence of parkinsonian features may be an independent risk factor for sleepiness in mild AD. (C) 2011 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