Sleep Quality and Disruptive Factors in Intensive Care Units: A Comparison Between Mechanically Ventilated and Spontaneously Breathing Patients.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Öznur Erbay Dalli, Nermin Kelebek Girgin
{"title":"Sleep Quality and Disruptive Factors in Intensive Care Units: A Comparison Between Mechanically Ventilated and Spontaneously Breathing Patients.","authors":"Öznur Erbay Dalli, Nermin Kelebek Girgin","doi":"10.1111/nicc.70097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sleep disturbances are common in intensive care units (ICUs) and negatively impact patient outcomes. Understanding differences in sleep quality and disrupting factors between patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) and spontaneously breathing patients (SBP) is essential for improving ICU care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare sleep quality and sleep-disrupting factors between patients receiving MV and SBP during their ICU stay.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This observational study was conducted in a 16-bed ICU in Türkiye. A total of 186 ICU patients (62 receiving MV and 124 SBP) were included. Sleep quality and disrupting factors were assessed using the Modified Freedman Sleep Quality Questionnaire (mFSQQ) and Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) at 24-h admission (T0) and pre-discharge (T1).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sleep quality scores were significantly lower in patients receiving MV than in SBP (p < 0.05). At T0, patients receiving MV experienced greater sleep disruptions due to pain and vital sign monitoring, while SBP had more disturbances from nursing interventions, medication administration and alarms (p < 0.05). By T1, sleep disturbances from pain, medical interventions and diagnostic procedures had significantly decreased in both groups (p < 0.05); however, environmental factors such as noise, lighting and staff conversations remained major disruptors. Repeated measures analysis showed a significant time effect for sleep disruptions from pain, nursing interventions, vital sign monitoring and medication administration (p < 0.001), while no time effect was found for noise, light or staff conversations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although patients receiving MV had lower sleep quality, ICU environmental factors were a major source of sleep fragmentation for all patients. These findings emphasise the need for ICU-wide and targeted interventions to optimise sleep quality.</p><p><strong>Relevance to clinical practice: </strong>Implementing tailored sleep protocols and optimising ICU care can reduce sleep disruptions, enhance patient comfort and improve recovery by addressing both patient-specific and environmental factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":51264,"journal":{"name":"Nursing in Critical Care","volume":"30 4","pages":"e70097"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12162166/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nicc.70097","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sleep disturbances are common in intensive care units (ICUs) and negatively impact patient outcomes. Understanding differences in sleep quality and disrupting factors between patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) and spontaneously breathing patients (SBP) is essential for improving ICU care.

Aim: To compare sleep quality and sleep-disrupting factors between patients receiving MV and SBP during their ICU stay.

Study design: This observational study was conducted in a 16-bed ICU in Türkiye. A total of 186 ICU patients (62 receiving MV and 124 SBP) were included. Sleep quality and disrupting factors were assessed using the Modified Freedman Sleep Quality Questionnaire (mFSQQ) and Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) at 24-h admission (T0) and pre-discharge (T1).

Results: Sleep quality scores were significantly lower in patients receiving MV than in SBP (p < 0.05). At T0, patients receiving MV experienced greater sleep disruptions due to pain and vital sign monitoring, while SBP had more disturbances from nursing interventions, medication administration and alarms (p < 0.05). By T1, sleep disturbances from pain, medical interventions and diagnostic procedures had significantly decreased in both groups (p < 0.05); however, environmental factors such as noise, lighting and staff conversations remained major disruptors. Repeated measures analysis showed a significant time effect for sleep disruptions from pain, nursing interventions, vital sign monitoring and medication administration (p < 0.001), while no time effect was found for noise, light or staff conversations.

Conclusion: Although patients receiving MV had lower sleep quality, ICU environmental factors were a major source of sleep fragmentation for all patients. These findings emphasise the need for ICU-wide and targeted interventions to optimise sleep quality.

Relevance to clinical practice: Implementing tailored sleep protocols and optimising ICU care can reduce sleep disruptions, enhance patient comfort and improve recovery by addressing both patient-specific and environmental factors.

重症监护病房中机械通气与自主呼吸患者睡眠质量及干扰因素的比较
背景:睡眠障碍在重症监护病房(icu)很常见,并对患者预后产生负面影响。了解机械通气患者(MV)和自主呼吸患者(SBP)睡眠质量差异和干扰因素对改善ICU护理至关重要。目的:比较中压和收缩压患者在ICU期间的睡眠质量和睡眠干扰因素。研究设计:本观察性研究在 rkiye的16床ICU进行。共纳入186例ICU患者,其中MV 62例,收缩压124例。采用改良的Freedman睡眠质量问卷(mFSQQ)和Richards-Campbell睡眠问卷(RCSQ)在入院24小时(T0)和出院前(T1)对睡眠质量和干扰因素进行评估。结果:中压组患者的睡眠质量评分明显低于收缩压组(p)。结论:虽然中压组患者的睡眠质量较低,但ICU环境因素是所有患者睡眠破碎的主要原因。这些发现强调了在icu范围内进行有针对性的干预以优化睡眠质量的必要性。与临床实践的相关性:实施量身定制的睡眠方案和优化ICU护理可以通过解决患者特异性和环境因素来减少睡眠中断,增强患者舒适度并促进康复。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
109
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing in Critical Care is an international peer-reviewed journal covering any aspect of critical care nursing practice, research, education or management. Critical care nursing is defined as the whole spectrum of skills, knowledge and attitudes utilised by practitioners in any setting where adults or children, and their families, are experiencing acute and critical illness. Such settings encompass general and specialist hospitals, and the community. Nursing in Critical Care covers the diverse specialities of critical care nursing including surgery, medicine, cardiac, renal, neurosciences, haematology, obstetrics, accident and emergency, neonatal nursing and paediatrics. Papers published in the journal normally fall into one of the following categories: -research reports -literature reviews -developments in practice, education or management -reflections on practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信