4.3 Article

Gastrointestinal symptoms negatively impact on sleep quality among obese individuals: a population-based study

期刊

SLEEP AND BREATHING
卷 20, 期 1, 页码 363-367

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11325-015-1282-z

关键词

Obesity; Sleep; Gastrointestinal symptoms; Quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reduced sleep quality has been linked to obesity; however, no studies have assessed the impact of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms on sleep quality among obese individuals. This study aims to determine the role of gastrointestinal symptoms on sleep among obese individuals in a community-based sample. A validated questionnaire was sent to 5000 randomly selected subjects in Western Sydney, Australia. Assessed were five GI symptoms that might wake individuals from sleep (abdominal pain, diarrhea, chest pain, acid regurgitation, and heartburn). Sleep quality was measured using the validated Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Additional measures included socioeconomic status (SES) and body mass index (BMI). The response rate was 60 %. There were 647 (25.13 %) obese individuals. Prevalence estimates for general quality of sleep were reported as very good (18.51 %), fairly good (53.19 %), fairly bad (20.68 %), and very bad (7.62 %). Obese individuals reported less hours of actual sleep than nonobese individuals (OR = 0.87; 95 % CI 0.81-0.94). Quality of sleep was worse for obese compared to nonobese individuals (OR = 1.25; 95 % CI 1.12-1.40). Univariate analysis found that all GI symptoms were more likely to wake obese people from their sleep; however, only two GI symptoms (chest pain: OR = 1.60; 95 % CI 1.25-2.04) and (acid regurgitation: OR = 1.27; 95 % CI 1.05-1.53) were independent predictors of sleep disturbance. Gastrointestinal symptoms did not predict waking in nonobese individuals. Chest pain and acid regurgitation are major GI symptoms associated with waking obese individuals from sleep. Overall, obese individuals have a worse quality of sleep compared to nonobese individuals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据