4.3 Article

Daytime Napping and Nighttime Sleep Duration with Incident Diabetes Mellitus: A Cohort Study in Chinese Older Adults

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18095012

Keywords

daytime napping; nighttime sleep duration; diabetes mellitus; Chinese elderly

Funding

  1. Sun Yat-Sen University [51000-18841211]
  2. Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation [2019A1515110571]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study showed that long daytime napping and extreme nighttime sleep duration among Chinese elderly were associated with increased risk of diabetes mellitus. There was a joint effect of long daytime napping and nighttime sleep duration on the risk of diabetes mellitus.
Background: We aimed to examine the longitudinal associations between daytime napping and nighttime sleep duration with the risk of diabetes mellitus (DM) among Chinese elderly using data from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS). Methods: A cohort study was conducted among 2620 participants aged 60 years or above. Information on daytime napping and nighttime sleep duration was self-reported during the 2011 baseline survey. DM status during the 2015 follow-up survey was confirmed according to the American Diabetes Association criteria. Results: Individuals with long daytime napping (>1 h/day) had increased risk of developing DM than non-nappers (adjusted RR = 1.52, 95%CI: 1.10, 2.10). In addition, we observed a U-shaped association between nighttime sleep duration and incident DM risk. We further found that nappers with <4 h of nighttime sleep, and those with >1 h of daytime napping and >6 h nighttime sleep had approximately two-fold elevated risk of DM, compared to non-nappers with 6-8 h of nighttime sleep. Conclusion: Long daytime napping and extreme nighttime sleep duration were associated with increased DM risk among Chinese elderly. There was a joint effect of long daytime napping and nighttime sleep duration on the risk of DM.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available