↓ Skip to main content

Long-Term Pain Treatment Did Not Improve Sleep in Nursing Home Patients with Comorbid Dementia and Depression: A 13-Week Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Long-Term Pain Treatment Did Not Improve Sleep in Nursing Home Patients with Comorbid Dementia and Depression: A 13-Week Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00134
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kjersti M. Blytt, Bettina Husebo, Elisabeth Flo, Bjørn Bjorvatn

Abstract

Objective: Previous research indicates that pain treatment may improve sleep among nursing home patients. We aimed to investigate the long-term effect of pain treatment on 24-h sleep patterns in patients with comorbid depression and dementia.Design:A 13-week, multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial conducted between August 2014 and September 2016.Setting:Long-term patients from 47 nursing homes in Norway.Participants:We included 106 patients with comorbid dementia and depression according to theMini Mental Status Examination (MMSE)and theCornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD).Intervention:Patients who were not using analgesics were randomized to receive either paracetamol (3 g/day) or placebo tablets. Those who already received pain treatment were randomized to buprenorphine transdermal system (maximum 10 μg/h/7 days) or placebo transdermal patches.Measurements:Sleep was assessed continuously for 7 days by actigraphy, at baseline and in week 13. Total sleep time (TST), sleep efficiency (SE), sleep onset latency (SOL), wake after sleep onset (WASO), early morning awakening (EMA), and number of wake bouts (NoW) were evaluated. In addition, daytime total sleep time (DTS) was estimated. Pain was assessed withMobilization-Observation-Behavior-Intensity-Dementia-2 Pain Scale(MOBID-2).Results:The linear mixed model analyses for TST, SE, SOL, WASO, EMA, NoW and DTS showed no statistically significant differences between patients who received active pain treatment and those who received placebo.Post hocsubgroup analyses showed that there were no statistically significant differences between active treatment and placebo from baseline to week 13 in patients who were in pain (MOBID-2 ≥ 3) at baseline, or in patients who had poor sleep (defined as SE < 85%) at baseline. Patients who received active buprenorphine showed an increase in TST and SE compared to those who received active paracetamol.Conclusion:The main analyses showed that long-term pain treatment did not improve sleep as measured with actigraphy. Compared to paracetamol, TST and SE increased among patients who received buprenorphine. This could indicate that some patients had beneficial effects from the most potent pain treatment. However, based on the present findings, long-term pain treatment is not recommended as a strategy to improve sleep. Clinical Trial https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02267057.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 20%
Psychology 10 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Engineering 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 24 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,143,840
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,839
of 30,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,542
of 446,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#147
of 541 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,274 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,080 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 541 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.