4.7 Article

Psychological Profile and Distinct Salivary Cortisol Awake Response (CAR) in Two Different Study Populations with Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) and Central Serous Chorioretinopathy (CSC)

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 9, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm9082490

关键词

salivary cortisol; AUC(CAR); SLOPECAR; obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC); Daily Hassles and Stress (DHS) questionnaire; Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAD); Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAS)

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of Health
  2. Fondazione Roma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC) are in terms of nosography different pathologies, however they share a stress-related physio-pathogenetic component, not yet explored in depth. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to ascertain whether OSA and CSC share a common profile, specifically in cortisol production focusing on the cortisol awake response (CAR), the area under curve (AUC(CAR)) and the SLOPE(CAR)compared with healthy matched controls. Furthermore, standardized self-administered questionnaires were used to identify mental health status related to depression, anxiety and subjective stress perception levels in the study populations. The results showed hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activity anomalies, represented by a flattening CAR in the OSA group and a statistically significant increase in cortisol production in CSC patients at awakening. This disarrangement of the HPA axis activity associated with elevated distress and mental health scores, and its presence in both patients with OSA and patients with CSC, might represent the shared path explaining the stress-related component in these diseases. Further research is needed to investigate the psycho-neuro-endocrinological aspects of OSA and CSC to determine whether psychoeducation on effective stress coping strategies might be of value in improving the quality of life of OSA and CSC patients.

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

4.7
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