4.6 Review

The relationship between preterm birth and sleep in children at school age: A systematic review

Journal

SLEEP MEDICINE REVIEWS
Volume 57, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.smrv.2021.101447

Keywords

Sleep characteristics; Preterm birth; Systematic review; School-aged children; Sleep problems

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that preterm birth is associated with sleep problems in children, including earlier bedtimes and lower sleep quality with more nocturnal awakenings and non-rapid eye movement stage 2 sleep. Future research should use consistent outcome measures to better understand the mechanisms influencing sleep in preterm children.
Premature birth (before 37 weeks of gestation) has been linked to a variety of adverse neurological outcomes. Sleep problems are associated with decreased neurocognitive functioning, which is especially common in children born preterm. The exact relationship between prematurity and sleep at school age is unknown. A systematic review is performed with the aim to assess the relationship between prematurity and sleep at school age (5th to 18th year of life), in comparison to sleep of their peers born full-term. Of 347 possibly eligible studies, nine were included. The overall conclusion is that prematurity is associated with earlier bedtimes and a lower sleep quality, in particular more nocturnal awakenings and more non-rapid eye movement stage 2 sleep. Interpretations and limitations of the review are discussed. Moreover, suggestions for future research are brought forward, including the need for a systematic approach with consistent outcome measures in this field of research. A better understanding of the mechanisms that influence sleep in the vulnerable group of children born preterm could help optimize these children's behavioral and intellectual development. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available