4.6 Review

Sleep quality during pregnancy: A meta-analysis

Journal

SLEEP MEDICINE REVIEWS
Volume 38, Issue -, Pages 168-176

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.smrv.2017.06.005

Keywords

Pregnancy; Sleep quality; Pittsburgh sleep quality index; Sleep disturbance

Funding

  1. Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada [430-2016-00469, 950-230847]
  2. Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute
  3. Canada Research Chairs program
  4. Canadian Child Health Clinician Scientist Program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Women's sleep quality has been reported to change during pregnancy; prevalence estimates of poor sleep quality during pregnancy vary widely. To further understand the observed variation of findings, we conducted a meta-analysis to quantify the prevalence of poor sleep quality during pregnancy. Articles (N = 24) that reported prevalence of poor sleep quality as captured by the Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) >= 5 were included, with a total of 11,002 participants contributing data. PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. Results indicated that the average PSQI score during pregnancy was 6.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) [5.30, 6.85], and 45.7%, 95% CI [36.5%, 55.2%], of pregnant women experienced poor sleep quality. Longitudinal studies indicated that sleep quality decreased from second (M = 5.31, SE = 0.40) to third trimester (M = 7.03, SE = 0.85) by 1.68 points, 95% CI [0.42, 2.94]. Gestational age moderated the average PSQI scores and prevalence of PSQI scores >= 5; older samples reported higher mean PSQI scores and higher prevalence of poor sleep quality. Clinicians should be aware that some reduction in sleep quality is expected during pregnancy, but complaints of very poor sleep quality could require intervention. Future research should examine various factors underlying poor sleep quality during pregnancy. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. 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