4.4 Article

Relationship between Long Sleep Duration and Functional Capacities in Postmenopausal women

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SLEEP MEDICINE
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages 309-313

Publisher

AMER ACAD SLEEP MEDICINE
DOI: 10.5664/jcsm.1922

Keywords

Chair stand test; balance opened eyes test; muscle strength and skeletal muscle mass

Funding

  1. University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM)
  2. YMCA
  3. Fond de la Recherche en Sante du Quebec (FRSQ)
  4. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Study Objective: The purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between long sleep duration and functional capacities. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study at the Department of Kinanthropology at the University of Quebec at Montreal. Forty eight non-frail postmenopausal women aged between 49 to 75 years were recruited using advertisements in local papers. Body weight, body mass index, fat mass, skeletal muscle mass, number of steps per day, SF-36 total (healthy questionnaire), resting metabolic rate, total energy intake, sleep duration, knee extensor strength (dynamometer), chair stand test and balance opened eyes test were measured. Results: We found a significant negative correlation between hours of sleep and functional capacity: chair stand test (r = -0.33, p = 0.02), balance opened eyes test (r = -0.45, p = 0.001), muscle strength (r = -0.43, p = 0.002) and skeletal muscle mass (r = -0.39, p = 0.007). In addition, long sleepers (> 9 h) had significantly lower values for skeletal muscle mass (p = 0.03), muscle strength (p = 0.01), chair stand test (p = 0.03), and balance opened eyes test (p = 0.001). Finally, linear regression analysis showed that sleep duration was an independent predictor of the chair stand test (p = 0.024), balance opened eyes test (p = 0.001), and muscle strength (p = 0.035) in our cohort. Conclusion: Long sleepers were associated with lower functional capacities in our cohort of sedentary postmenopausal women.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available