Department of Nursing, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
J Sleep Res. 2012 Oct;21(5):527-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2869.2012.01010.x. Epub 2012 Mar 30.
Although sleep diary and actigraphy data are usually collected daily for 1 or 2 weeks, traditional analytical approaches aggregate these data into mean values. Internight variability of sleep often accompanies insomnia. However, few studies have explored the relevance of this 'construct' in the context of diagnosis, clinical impact, treatment effects and/or whether having 'variable sleep' carries any prognostic significance. We explored these questions by conducting secondary analyses of data from a randomized clinical trial. The sample included primary (PI: n = 40) and comorbid insomnia (CMI: n = 41) sufferers receiving four biweekly sessions of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) or sleep hygiene education. Using the within-subject standard deviations of diary- and actigraphy-derived measures collected for 2-week periods [sleep onset latency (SOL), wake after sleep onset (WASO), total sleep time (TST) and sleep efficiency (SE)], we found that CMI sufferers displayed more variable self-reported SOLs and SEs than PI sufferers. However, higher variability in diary and actigraphy-derived measures was related to poorer sleep quality only within the PI group, as measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Within both groups, the variability of diary-derived measures was reduced after CBT, but the variability of actigraphy-derived measures remained unchanged. Interestingly, the variability of actigraphy measures at baseline was correlated with PSQI scores at 6-month follow-up. Higher SOL variability was associated with worse treatment outcomes within the PI group, whereas higher WASO variability was correlated with better treatment outcomes within the CMI group. Sleep variability differences across insomnia diagnoses, along with their distinctive correlates, suggest that mechanisms underlying the sleep disruption/complaint and treatment response in both patient groups are distinct. Further studies are warranted to support variability as a useful metric in insomnia studies.
尽管睡眠日记和活动记录仪数据通常每天收集 1 或 2 周,但传统的分析方法将这些数据汇总为平均值。睡眠的日内变异性常伴有失眠。然而,很少有研究探讨这种“结构”在诊断、临床影响、治疗效果以及是否存在“可变睡眠”方面的相关性。我们通过对一项随机临床试验的数据进行二次分析来探讨这些问题。该样本包括原发性失眠(PI:n=40)和共病性失眠障碍(CMI:n=41)患者,他们接受了 4 次双周认知行为疗法(CBT)或睡眠卫生教育。使用日记和活动记录仪衍生测量值的 2 周内的个体内标准偏差(睡眠潜伏期[SOL]、睡眠后觉醒[WASO]、总睡眠时间[TST]和睡眠效率[SE]),我们发现 CMI 患者的自我报告 SOL 和 SE 变异性比 PI 患者更大。然而,仅在 PI 组中,日记和活动记录仪衍生测量值的变异性与较差的睡眠质量相关,由匹兹堡睡眠质量指数(PSQI)测量。在两组中,CBT 后日记衍生测量值的变异性降低,但活动记录仪衍生测量值的变异性保持不变。有趣的是,基线时活动记录仪测量值的变异性与 6 个月随访时的 PSQI 评分相关。PI 组中 SOL 变异性越高,治疗效果越差,而 CMI 组中 WASO 变异性越高,治疗效果越好。不同失眠诊断之间的睡眠变异性差异及其独特的相关性表明,两组患者中导致睡眠中断/抱怨和治疗反应的机制不同。需要进一步的研究来支持变异性作为失眠研究中的有用指标。