4.6 Review

The past, present, and future of sleep measurement in mild cognitive impairment and early dementia-towards a core outcome set: a scoping review

Journal

SLEEP
Volume 45, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsac077

Keywords

sleep; Alzheimer's disease; mild cognitive impairment; MCI; AD

Funding

  1. Alzheimer's Research UK (Margaret Jost Fellowship and the Don Thoburn Memorial Scholarship)
  2. David Telling Charitable Trust
  3. BRACE Dementia Research and EC
  4. Above
  5. Beyond and BRACE charities [ABL-2019-20-01 / GA2678]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This scoping review aims to determine how sleep is currently measured and reported in patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and early dementia. The study found that despite technological advances, questionnaires were still the most commonly used method to measure sleep, and sleep outcome parameters were reported heterogeneously.
Study Objectives Sleep abnormalities emerge early in dementia and may accelerate cognitive decline. Their accurate characterization may facilitate earlier clinical identification of dementia and allow for assessment of sleep intervention efficacy. This scoping review determines how sleep is currently measured and reported in Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and early dementia, as a basis for future core outcome alignment. Methods This review follows the PRISMA Guidelines for Scoping Reviews. CINAHL, Embase, Medline, Psychinfo, and British Nursing Index databases were searched from inception-March 12, 2021. Included studies had participants diagnosed with MCI and early dementia and reported on sleep as a key objective/ outcome measure. Results Nineteen thousand five hundred and ninety-six titles were returned following duplicate removal with 188 studies [N] included in final analysis. Sleep data was reported on 17 139 unique, diagnostically diverse participants (n). Unspecified MCI was the most common diagnosis amongst patients with MCI (n = 5003, 60.6%). Despite technological advances, sleep was measured most commonly by validated questionnaires (n = 12 586, N = 131). Fewer participants underwent polysomnography (PSG) (n = 3492, N = 88) and actigraphy (n = 3359, N = 38) with little adoption of non-PSG electroencephalograms (EEG) (n = 74, N = 3). Sleep outcome parameters were reported heterogeneously. 62/165 (37.6%) were described only once in the literature (33/60 (60%) in interventional studies). There was underrepresentation of circadian (n = 725, N = 25) and micro-architectural (n = 360, N = 12) sleep parameters. Conclusions Alongside under-researched areas, there is a need for more detailed diagnostic characterization. Due to outcome heterogeneity, we advocate for international consensus on core sleep outcome parameters to support causal inference and comparison of therapeutic sleep interventions.

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