1
|
See QR, Raheel K, Duncan I, Biabani N, Di Giulio I, Romigi A, Kumari V, O’Regan D, Cairney S, Urso D, Chaudhuri KR, Gnoni V, Drakatos P, Rosenzweig I. Dreaming Characteristics in Non-Rapid Eye Movement Parasomnia and Idiopathic Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Behaviour Disorder: Similarities and Differences. Nat Sci Sleep 2024; 16:263-277. [PMID: 38482468 PMCID: PMC10933526 DOI: 10.2147/nss.s435201] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2023] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 03/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Speech graph analysis (SGA) of dreams has recently shown promise as an objective and language-invariant diagnostic tool that can aid neuropsychiatric diagnosis. Whilst the notion that dreaming mentations reflect distinct physiologic processes is not new, such studies in patients with sleep disorders remain exceptionally scarce. Here, using SGA and other dream content analyses, we set to investigate structural and thematic differences in morning dream recalls of patients diagnosed with Non-Rapid Eye Movement Parasomnia (NREMP) and Idiopathic REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (iRBD). Methods A retrospective cross-sectional study of morning dream recalls of iRBD and NREMP patients was undertaken. Traditional dream content analyses, such as Orlinsky and Hall and Van de Castle analyses, were initially conducted. Subsequently, SGA was performed in order to objectively quantify structural speech differences between the dream recalls of the two patient groups. Results Comparable rate of morning recall of dreams in the sleep laboratory was recorded; 25% of iRBD and 18.35% of NREMP patients. Aggression in dreams was recorded by 28.57% iRBD versus 20.00% in NREMP group. iRBD patients were more likely to recall dreams (iRBD vs NREMP; P = 0.007), but they also had more white dreams, ie having a feeling of having dreamt, but with no memory of it. Visual and quantitative graph speech analyses of iRBD dreams suggested stable sequential structure, reflecting the linearity of the chronological narrative. Conversely, NREMP dream reports displayed more recursive, less stable systems, with significantly higher scores of graph connectivity measures. Conclusion The findings of our exploratory study suggest that iRBD and NREMP patients may not only differ on what is recalled in their dreams but also, perhaps more strikingly, on how dreams are recalled. It is hoped that future SGA-led dream investigations of larger groups of patients will help discern distinct mechanistic underpinnings and any associated clinical implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qi Rui See
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
| | - Kausar Raheel
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
| | - Iain Duncan
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
| | - Nazanin Biabani
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
| | - Irene Di Giulio
- School of Basic and Medical Biosciences, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King’s College London, London, U.K
| | - Andrea Romigi
- IRCCS Neuromed Istituto Neurologico Mediterraneo Pozzilli (IS), Pozzilli, Italy
| | - Veena Kumari
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
- Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, U.K
| | - David O’Regan
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
- School of Basic and Medical Biosciences, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King’s College London, London, U.K
- Sleep Disorders Centre, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, U.K
| | - Scott Cairney
- Department of Psychology, University of York and York Biomedical Research Institute, University of York, York, U.K
| | - Daniele Urso
- Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases and the Aging Brain, Department of Clinical Research in Neurology, University of Bari ‘Aldo Moro’, “Pia Fondazione Cardinale G. Panico”, Tricase, Lecce, Italy
- Movement Disorders Unit, King’s College Hospital and Department of Clinical and Basic Neurosciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience and Parkinson Foundation Centre of Excellence, King’s College London, London, U.K
| | - K Ray Chaudhuri
- Movement Disorders Unit, King’s College Hospital and Department of Clinical and Basic Neurosciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience and Parkinson Foundation Centre of Excellence, King’s College London, London, U.K
| | - Valentina Gnoni
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
- Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases and the Aging Brain, Department of Clinical Research in Neurology, University of Bari ‘Aldo Moro’, “Pia Fondazione Cardinale G. Panico”, Tricase, Lecce, Italy
| | - Panagis Drakatos
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
- School of Basic and Medical Biosciences, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King’s College London, London, U.K
- Sleep Disorders Centre, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, U.K
| | - Ivana Rosenzweig
- Sleep and Brain Plasticity Centre, Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King’s College London, London, U.K
- Sleep Disorders Centre, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, U.K
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Horton CL. The neurocognition of dreaming: key questions and foci. Emerg Top Life Sci 2023; 7:477-486. [PMID: 38130166 DOI: 10.1042/etls20230099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2023] [Revised: 11/30/2023] [Accepted: 12/01/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
Until recently, understanding the neurobiology of dreaming has relied upon on correlating a subjective dream report with a measure of brain activity or function sampled from a different occasion. As such, most assumptions about dreaming come from the neuroscience of rapid eye-movement (REM) sleep from which many, but not all, dream reports are recalled. Core features of REM sleep (intense emotional activation, a reduction in activity in most frontal regions, particularly the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, along with increased dopamine, acetylcholine, cholinergic activation) align with typical dream characteristics (characterised by fear, reduced reality monitoring, increased bizarreness and hyperassociativity, respectively). The default mode network offers a way of understanding the nature of dreaming more independently from a REM sleep context, and electroencephalography methods paired with serial awakenings to elicit dream reports demonstrate how high-frequency activity in posterior regions may be associated with dreaming. Nevertheless, all measures of dreaming rely fundamentally on recall processes, so our understanding of dreaming must embrace and address memory's crucial involvement in dream report production.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline L Horton
- DrEAMSLab, Bishop Grosseteste University, Longdales Road, Lincoln LN1 3DY, U.K
| |
Collapse
|