Sleep Quality Assessment in Intensive Care Units: Comparing Actigraphy and the Richards Campbell Sleep Questionnaire-A Pilot Study in the Moroccan Context.
{"title":"Sleep Quality Assessment in Intensive Care Units: Comparing Actigraphy and the Richards Campbell Sleep Questionnaire-A Pilot Study in the Moroccan Context.","authors":"Abdelmajid Lkoul, Keltouma Oumbarek, Youssef Bouchriti, Asmaa Jniene, Tarek Dendane","doi":"10.3390/clockssleep7030049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sleep in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is frequently disrupted, which may adversely affect their overall health and recovery. Despite the implementation of various strategies to promote sleep, accurately assessing its quality remains complex. This pilot study aimed to evaluate both the quality and quantity of sleep in ICU patients using actigraphy (ACT) and the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) and to compare the diagnostic performance of these two tools. We conducted a prospective observational study including 228 ICU patients. Sleep was assessed using both RCSQ and ACT. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the discriminative ability of each tool (Area Under the Curve [AUC], sensitivity, specificity), with optimal cut-off points determined using Youden's Index. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare sleep parameters between patients classified as having good or poor sleep based on ACT measurements. The mean RCSQ score was 38.16 ± 17.09, indicating poor perceived sleep quality. Sleep onset latency (based on RCSQ) was 35.71 ± 21.44 min, with a mean of 40.32 ± 20.03 awakenings. According to ACT, sleep latency was 39.23 ± 22.09 min, and total sleep duration was 198.15 ± 128.42 min (approximately 3 h and 18 min), which is significantly below recommended levels. The average number of awakenings recorded was 24.85. In terms of diagnostic performance, the RCSQ demonstrated excellent discriminative ability (AUC = 1.00 for the total score), while ACT showed more variable results: total sleep duration had a good AUC of 0.91, while sleep latency showed a lower performance with an AUC of 0.50. The RCSQ proved to be more reliable than ACT in assessing sleep quality in ICU patients, providing consistent results across multiple parameters, including sleep depth, latency, and number of awakenings. Conversely, ACT yielded less consistent findings, particularly regarding sleep latency and nighttime interruptions. Further studies are warranted to refine objective tools for evaluating sleep in critically ill patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":33568,"journal":{"name":"Clocks & Sleep","volume":"7 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12452742/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clocks & Sleep","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/clockssleep7030049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Sleep in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is frequently disrupted, which may adversely affect their overall health and recovery. Despite the implementation of various strategies to promote sleep, accurately assessing its quality remains complex. This pilot study aimed to evaluate both the quality and quantity of sleep in ICU patients using actigraphy (ACT) and the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) and to compare the diagnostic performance of these two tools. We conducted a prospective observational study including 228 ICU patients. Sleep was assessed using both RCSQ and ACT. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the discriminative ability of each tool (Area Under the Curve [AUC], sensitivity, specificity), with optimal cut-off points determined using Youden's Index. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare sleep parameters between patients classified as having good or poor sleep based on ACT measurements. The mean RCSQ score was 38.16 ± 17.09, indicating poor perceived sleep quality. Sleep onset latency (based on RCSQ) was 35.71 ± 21.44 min, with a mean of 40.32 ± 20.03 awakenings. According to ACT, sleep latency was 39.23 ± 22.09 min, and total sleep duration was 198.15 ± 128.42 min (approximately 3 h and 18 min), which is significantly below recommended levels. The average number of awakenings recorded was 24.85. In terms of diagnostic performance, the RCSQ demonstrated excellent discriminative ability (AUC = 1.00 for the total score), while ACT showed more variable results: total sleep duration had a good AUC of 0.91, while sleep latency showed a lower performance with an AUC of 0.50. The RCSQ proved to be more reliable than ACT in assessing sleep quality in ICU patients, providing consistent results across multiple parameters, including sleep depth, latency, and number of awakenings. Conversely, ACT yielded less consistent findings, particularly regarding sleep latency and nighttime interruptions. Further studies are warranted to refine objective tools for evaluating sleep in critically ill patients.
重症监护病房(ICU)患者的睡眠经常被打乱,这可能对他们的整体健康和康复产生不利影响。尽管实施了各种促进睡眠的策略,但准确评估睡眠质量仍然很复杂。本初步研究旨在利用活动记录仪(ACT)和Richards-Campbell睡眠问卷(RCSQ)评估ICU患者的睡眠质量和数量,并比较这两种工具的诊断性能。我们对228例ICU患者进行了前瞻性观察性研究。采用RCSQ和ACT对睡眠进行评估。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析评估各工具的判别能力(曲线下面积(Area Under the curve, AUC)、敏感性、特异性),并采用约登指数确定最佳截断点。曼-惠特尼U检验用于比较根据ACT测量分为睡眠质量好或睡眠质量差的患者之间的睡眠参数。RCSQ平均得分为38.16±17.09,提示感知睡眠质量较差。睡眠发作潜伏期(基于RCSQ)为35.71±21.44 min,平均醒来40.32±20.03次。根据ACT,睡眠潜伏期为39.23±22.09 min,总睡眠时间为198.15±128.42 min(约3小时18分钟),明显低于推荐水平。平均醒来次数为24.85次。在诊断性能方面,RCSQ表现出优秀的判别能力(AUC = 1.00的总分),而ACT表现出更多的变数:总睡眠持续时间的AUC较好,为0.91,而睡眠潜伏期的AUC较低,为0.50。RCSQ在评估ICU患者睡眠质量方面比ACT更可靠,在多个参数(包括睡眠深度、潜伏期和醒来次数)中提供一致的结果。相反,ACT得出的结果不太一致,尤其是在睡眠潜伏期和夜间中断方面。需要进一步的研究来完善评估危重病人睡眠的客观工具。