1 / 29

Esther Bernhofer, RN-BC, PhD September 14, 2012

Esther Bernhofer, RN-BC, PhD September 14, 2012 2012 National State of the Science Congress on Nursing Research Washington, DC. Describing Light Exposure, Sleep, Mood, and Pain in Medical Inpatients. Background/Significance.

waylon
Télécharger la présentation

Esther Bernhofer, RN-BC, PhD September 14, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Esther Bernhofer, RN-BC, PhD September 14, 2012 2012 National State of the Science Congress on Nursing Research Washington, DC Describing Light Exposure, Sleep, Mood, and Pain in Medical Inpatients l l 1

  2. Background/Significance • Hospital lighting may interfere with circadian rhythmicity and sleep-wake patterns • Lighting may affect mood • Mood and lighting may be related to pain which remains an issue for medical inpatients l l 2

  3. Purpose • To examine the relationships among the four variables of light exposure, sleep-wake patterns, mood and pain in hospitalized adult medical patients l l 3

  4. Theoretical Framework • Nightingale’s Environmental Theory • 1859, Florence Nightingale: sunlight is critical to the healing of body and mind; light exposure could be manipulated by the nurse • The Heitkemper and Shaver Human Response Model (HRM) • Describes the relationships among the concepts of person (patient), environment (light exposure), and individual adaptation (sleep-wake patterns, mood, and pain). l l 4

  5. Study Model Sleep-Wake Patterns Light Exposure Pain Mood l l 5

  6. Design and Method • Predictive correlational design • 72-hour data collection: • Light exposure and sleep-wake patterns continuously measured via actigraph/light meter • Mood measured daily with POMS™ Brief Form • Demographics, pain scores, and opioid use abstracted from participants’ medical records. l l 6

  7. Sample (N = 40) • 246 eligible patients identified • 168 unavailable • 78 approached • 19 declined (24%) • 59 enrolled • 19 dropped from analysis due to incomplete data: actigraph failure (n = 9) or medical condition (n = 10) l l 7

  8. l l 8

  9. Light Exposure Patterns Among Study Participants l l 9

  10. Light exposure patterns based on geographical orientation Statistically significant difference between light exposure in the north-east facing beds and the south-west facing beds, t(37) = -2.16, p < .05 during Day time. l l 10

  11. Sleep-wake patterns • Nighttime sleep, in minutes (M = 236.35, SD = 72.27, range 62.00 to 391.00) • Daytime sleep, in minutes (M = 161.02, SD = 81.40, range 5.33 to 391.33) • Further analysis • 35% - slept >3 hours (>183 minutes) day • 50% - slept <4 hours (<233 minutes) night l l 11

  12. Sleep-wake patterns: Fragmentation l l 12 • FRAG score (M = 9.37/8 hours, SD = 5.55, range 2.0 to 27.0) • 20% scored greater than 12.0 on the FRAG • Wake after sleep onset (WASO) • WASO minutes (M = 112.51, SD = 48.67, range 28.00 to 228.33) • 25% were awake 145 minutes (2.5 hours) first sleep episode on the first night of the study

  13. Sleep-wake patterns: Fragmentation l l 13 • Intra-daily variability (IV) • Possible range = 0 to 2.0+ • IV values of 2.0+ were frequently seen, but decreased from Day 1(M = 1.56) to Day 2 (M = 1.22) to Day 3 (M = 1.26) • Inter-daily stability (IS) • Possible range = 0.0 to 1.0 • IS values indicated low synchronization (M = 0.37, SD = 0.13, range 0.04 to 0.76)

  14. l l 14

  15. Mood POMS™ Brief questionnaire results l l 15

  16. Mean Pain Scores over the 72 hours of the Study (N = 40) l l 16

  17. Age and Gender • No statistically significant differences were found between gender and pain intensity levels • No statistically significant differences in pain intensity reports were found among age groups • Contrast with other studies…Pain perception may change with the process of aging (Kelly, 2009; Martin et al., 2007). There may be gender-based differences in pain perception, pain expression, and mood (Trame & Rawe, 2009). l l 17

  18. Opioid Use • Over 72 hours: mean grams of oral morphine equivalent used daily = 219.97 (SD = 370.71) • Large SD: high variation of individual opioid use • Positive, moderately strong correlation between mean pain scores and opioids used (n = 38, r = .46, p < .01). • Opioid use did not significantly decrease over 3 days like pain scores did l l 18

  19. Significant Correlations • Total mood disturbance (TMD) and subscales • TMD and daytime light exposure (r = -.32, p < .05) • Daytime light exp. and fatigue (r = -.34, p < .05) • Daytime light exp. and confusion (r = -.32, p < .05) • Pain and fatigue (r = .34, p < .05) • Pain and opioid use (r = .47, p < .05) • TMD and opioid use (r = .42, p < .05) • Anger and opioid use (r = .53, p < .05) l l 19

  20. Significant Predictors • Only one variable, fatigue, significantly predicted pain, R2 = .11, R2 adj= .09, F(1, 38) = 4.84, p < .01 • Light exposure significantly predicted mean fatigue scores, R2 = .11, R2 adj= .09, F(1, 38) = 4.86, p < .05. l l 20

  21. Interpretation • Brightest patient-bed rooms • very low light during the day/night in all seasons, eliminates vital photic stimuli • still statistically significant negative correlations between daytime light exposure and TMD, fatigue, and confusion l l 21

  22. Interpretation • Sleep was fragmented with little circadian synchronization with hospital lighting • Pain remained moderate to high • Fatigue significantly predicted pain • Light exposure significantly predicted fatigue l l 22

  23. Sleep-Wake Patterns Light Exposure Pain Mood Checking the Study Model… X X X O O l l 23 • YES, light exposure and mood • YES, aspects of mood and pain • NO, light exposure and sleep-wake patterns • NO, sleep-wake patterns and pain • NO, mood and sleep-wake patterns

  24. Sleep-Wake Patterns Light Exposure Pain Mood But perhaps… O O X O O l l 24 • If fatigue were categorized as a sleep-wake pattern (disturbance), then the model may look more like this… • And mood needs further study in this population

  25. Limitations • Wrist-worn device could be covered with clothing or bedding – although preliminary studies showed high reliability • High attrition rate resulted in the lower than expected sample size of 40 • Biological markers: serum melatonin and salivary cortisol would have added to the findings on circadian entrainment and mood • POMS™ mood instrument may not be valid in this population l l 25

  26. Summary Participants suffered significant pain and little, fragmented sleep. 24-hour light exposure was inadequate to support circadian entrainment (sleep-wake rhythmicity). Although significant relationships among all of the four variables were not found, certain significant associations were found, among them light/fatigue and fatigue/pain. Study provides a basis for future nursing research and education in the utilization of light exposure in the hospital and community l l 26

  27. Long-term Goals Bring to light the problem of inadequately managed pain in adult medical inpatients Develop intervention studies involving manipulation of hospital lighting to treat sleep-wake disturbances, mood, and pain. l l 27

  28. CWRU-FPB • Patricia Higgins, RN, PhD • Thomas Hornick, MD • Barbara Daly, RN, PhD • Christopher Burant, PhD • Cleveland Clinic • Patient participants • ASPMN Research Grant Acknowledgement and Thanks! l l 28

  29. Questions? l l 29

More Related