4.6 Article

Poor Self-Reported Sleep Quality Predicts Mortality within One Year of Inpatient Post-Acute Rehabilitation among Older Adults

期刊

SLEEP
卷 34, 期 12, 页码 1715-1721

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.5665/sleep.1444

关键词

Aging; rehabilitation; mortality

资金

  1. NIA [K23 AG028452]
  2. VA HSRD [IIR-01-053-1, IIR 04-321-2, AIA-03-047]
  3. NIMH [T32 MH 019925-11, T32 MH019934]
  4. VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center (GRECC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Study Objective: To evaluate the association between self-reported sleep quality among older adults during inpatient post-acute rehabilitation and one-year survival. Design: Prospective, observational cohort study. Setting: Two inpatient post-acute rehabilitation sites (one community and one Veterans Administration). Participants: Older patients (aged >= 65 years, n = 245) admitted for inpatient post-acute rehabilitation. Interventions: None. Measurements and Results: Within one year of post-acute rehabilitation, 57 participants (23%) were deceased. Cox proportional hazards models showed that worse Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) total scores during the post-acute care stay were associated with increased mortality risk when controlling for amount of rehabilitation therapy received, comorbidities, and cognitive functioning (Hazard ratio [95% CI] = 1.11 [1.02-1.20]). Actigraphically estimated sleep was unrelated to mortality risk. Conclusions: Poorer self-reported sleep quality, but not objectively estimated sleep parameters, during post-acute rehabilitation was associated with shorter survival among older adults. This suggests self-reported poor sleep may be an important and potentially modifiable risk factor for negative outcomes in these vulnerable older adults. Studies of interventions to improve sleep quality during inpatient rehabilitation should therefore be undertaken, and the long-term health benefits of improved sleep should be explored.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据