4.1 Article

Sleep disturbance in relatives of palliative patients cared for at home

Journal

PALLIATIVE & SUPPORTIVE CARE
Volume 10, Issue 3, Pages 165-170

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1478951511000836

Keywords

Palliative home care; Relatives; Insomnia; Daytime sleepiness

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of the present pilot study was to investigate insomnia, sleep quality, and daytime sleepiness in relatives of dying patients cared for at home. Method: The study has a descriptive, comparative, and cross-sectional design. The sample consisted of relatives of patients cared for through palliative home care in Uppsala County on 3 specific days. Relatives completed a questionnaire consisting of demographic questions, and items from the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and the Richard Campell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ). Results: Seventy-five relatives answered the questionnaire. The average total ISI score was 9.6, with 23% reporting moderate or severe clinical insomnia. The mean sleep duration was 6.5 hours, the mean assessed need of sleep was 8 hours, and the mean discrepancy was 1 hour. The total mean ESS score was 5.6 and only 15% of respondents reported excessive daytime sleepiness. Four percent scored very poor sleep quality, whereas 39% scored very good sleep quality (RCSQ). Two general age-and gender-related patterns were observed. Negative correlations were found between age and sleep problems, with younger relatives reporting more insomnia problems and more daytime sleepiness than did older relatives. The other general pattern was that womens' sleep quality was significantly inferior to that of men. A significant positive correlation was found between ISI and ESS, but not between RCSQ and ESS. Significance of results: The picture of the relatives' sleep condition is fairly complex. A minority reported clinical insomnia problems or excessive daytime sleepiness, and 73% reported getting less sleep than they wanted.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available