A systematic review and proposed conceptual model of sleep disturbances during pediatric hospitalizations

A nursing perspective on inpatient sleep and circadian disruptions for pediatric stem cell transplant patients

BACKGROUND

Children treated with stem cell transplant (SCT) are routinely hospitalized for long periods where they are exposed to significant sleep and circadian disruptions. As nurses play a primary role in symptom management during SCT, we sought to understand their perspective on patient sleep and circadian disruptions, perceived barriers to a good sleep and circadian environment, and suggestions for improvement.

PROCEDURE

Four focus groups were conducted with pediatric SCT nurses (N = 25 participants). A semistructured focus group guide was administered, with the discussions recorded and transcribed. A multistage thematic analysis combining prefigured and emergent dimensions was conducted. Our analysis focused on drawing comparisons within and across focus groups to understand the unique work experiences that participants had related to the patient's sleep and circadian environment.

RESULTS

Three key themes emerged. First, nurses expressed a high awareness of how disruptive the hospital environment is for patients. Second, nurses described their extensive efforts to try to minimize the impact of these disruptions. Finally, they provided clear recommendations for how to improve upon these concerns, along with barriers that they perceive could impede implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Front-line caregivers on a pediatric SCT unit describe key contributors to sleep/circadian disturbances for patients. Within the constraints of the considerable medical needs of this patient population and the physical room/hospital environment, nurses strive to minimize these disruptions to the best of their ability. It is crucial that hospitals assess and remediate these disturbances for these children that have important implications for overall health.

Sleep and circadian disruptors: Unhealthy noise and light levels for hospitalized pediatric patients

Noise and light levels during hospitalizations can disrupt sleep and circadian health, resulting in worsened health outcomes. This study describes patterns of noise and light for inpatient children undergoing stem cell transplants. Objective meters tracked noise and light levels every minute for 6 months. Median overnight sound was 55 dB (equivalent to conversational speech). There were 3.4 loud noises (>80 dB) per night on average. Children spent 62% of the 24-h cycle in nonoptimal lighting, with daytime light dimmer than recommended 98% of the time. Over the 6-month period, the lowest overnight noise level recorded exceeded World Health Organization recommendations for sleep, with frequent spikes into ranges known to cause wakings. During the day, children were rarely exposed to light sufficient to preserve healthy circadian rhythms. Hospitals should address systematic environmental and workflow disruptors to improve the sleep and circadian health of patients, particularly those already at elevated risk for health morbidities.

Gaps in Parental Understanding of Sleep Disturbances During Maintenance Therapy for Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Background: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is the most common cancer in childhood, with survival rates approaching 90%. Sleep disturbance is common among ALL patients, often developing during the initial stages of chemotherapy treatment. While there have been significant efforts to understand and intervene in this issue during survivorship, there is far less research on children who are actively receiving treatment. In the current study, we sought to better understand the parent's experience in the sleep domain during maintenance therapy, including their perceptions of how their child's medical team had managed sleep disturbances, and recommendations for how to improve sleep management. Method: Fifteen parents of pediatric ALL patients (aged 4-12 years) completed semistructured interviews. Interview content was analyzed using a multistage thematic analysis. Results: Parents consistently expressed feeling unprepared to manage the sleep disruptions that arose during treatment, often reporting that they did not recall being told this would be a side effect. They were enthusiastic about learning how to improve their child's sleep, though they did not want pharmacotherapeutic interventions or additional medical/psychosocial appointments to address this. Conclusion: Despite consistent provider communication on sleep, parents report limited knowledge of the issue. This provides an obvious intervention target to improve treatment-related sleep disturbances. Clear messaging may help direct parents' attention and expectations regarding their child's treatment and potential for disturbed sleep, possibly in the form of a behavioral intervention that empowers parents with information about how to support their child's sleep health while they are undergoing treatment for ALL.

The effectiveness of non-pharmacological sleep interventions for improving inpatient sleep in hospital: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbance is common in hospital. The hospital environment can have a negative impact on sleep quality, through factors such as noise, light, temperature, and nursing care disruptions. Poor sleep can lead to delays in recovery, wound healing, and increase risk of post-operative infection.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of non-pharmacological sleep interventions for improving inpatient sleep. The primary outcome was sleep quality, the secondary outcome was length of hospital stay, the harm outcome was adverse events. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 17^th February 2022. Meta-analysis was conducted using a fixed effects model, with narrative synthesis for studies with no useable data. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool.

RESULTS

76 studies identified with 5375 people randomised comparing 85 interventions. Interventions focused on physical sleep aids (n = 26), relaxation (n = 25), manual therapy (n = 12), music (n = 9), psychological therapy (n = 5), light therapy (n = 3), sleep protocols (n = 2), milk and honey (n = 1), exercise (n = 1), and nursing care (n = 1). In meta-analysis, medium to large improvements in sleep quality were noted for sleep aids, relaxation, music, and manual therapies. Results were generally consistent in studies at lower risk of bias. Length of hospital stay and adverse events were reported for some studies, with benefit in some trials but this was not consistent across all interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical sleep aids, relaxation, manual therapy and music interventions have a strong evidence base for improving inpatient sleep quality. Research is needed to evaluate how to optimise interventions into routine care.