Lyons, M. Melanie

This article addresses the issue of patient sleep during hospitalization, which the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine believes merits wider consideration by health authorities than it has received to date. Adequate sleep is fundamental to health and well-being, and insufficiencies in its duration, quality, or timing have adverse effects that are acutely evident. These include cardiovascular dysfunction, impaired ventilatory function, cognitive impairment, increased pain perception, psychomotor disturbance (including increased fall risk), psychological disturbance (including anxiety and depression), metabolic dysfunction (including increased insulin resistance and catabolic propensity), and immune dysfunction and proinflammatory effects (increasing infection risk and pain generation). All these changes negatively impact health status and are counterproductive to recovery from illness and operation. Hospitalization challenges sleep in a variety of ways. These challenges include environmental factors such as noise, bright light, and overnight awakenings for observations, interventions, and transfers; physiological factors such as pain, dyspnea, bowel or urinary dysfunction, or discomfort from therapeutic devices; psychological factors such as stress and anxiety; care-related factors including medications or medication withdrawal; and preexisting sleep disorders that may not be recognized or adequately managed. Many of these challenges appear readily addressable. The key to doing so is to give sleep greater priority, with attention directed at ensuring that patients’ sleep needs are recognized and met, both within the hospital and beyond. Requirements include staff education, creation of protocols to enhance the prospect of sleep needs being addressed, and improvement in hospital design to mitigate environmental disturbances. Hospitals and health care providers have a duty to provide, to the greatest extent possible, appropriate preconditions for healing. Accumulating evidence suggests that these preconditions include adequate patient sleep duration and quality. The Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine calls for systematic changes in the approach of hospital leadership and staff to this issue. Measures required include incorporation of optimization of patient sleep into the objectives of perioperative and general patient care guidelines. These steps should be complemented by further research into the impact of hospitalization on sleep, the effects of poor sleep on health outcomes after hospitalization, and assessment of interventions to improve it.

Abstract Introduction Advanced Practice Providers (APPs; Advanced practice registered nurses, physician assistants) and physicians-in-training (residents, fellows) receive inadequate education on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)/perioperative OSA risks. However, they are front-line providers assessing these patients. Failure to mitigate this risk has led to significant postoperative morbidity/mortality. We assessed these providers’ perceptions to OSA/perioperative OSA training. Methods Surveys were sent to three provider roles, APPs, residents, and fellows, in four categories of practice at nine academic institutions between May 9-June 30, 2021. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests assessed association between survey responses and participant characteristics. False discovery rate adjustment accounted for multiple comparisons, threshold of q<0.05 for statistical significance. Cochran-Mantel-Haenzsel tests evaluated associations stratified by institution. Results 2236 of 6724 (33.3%) participants responded: 48.4% APPs, 11% Fellows and 40.6% Residents. Primary category of practice included: 20.3% Anesthesiology, 8.9% Family Medicine, 34.1%, Internal Medicine (IM)/IM subspecialties, 6.7% Obstetrics/Gynecology/Gynecologic Oncology, 25.9% Surgery/Surgery subspecialties, 4.1% Other.While 93.2% of respondents believed OSA is a risk factor for perioperative complications, fewer respondents reported that they felt adequately trained to assess for OSA (50.9%) in general, with significant differences noted by provider role (range 42-70%, q=0.001) and across the categories of practice (range 12-82%, q=0.001). Even fewer felt adequately trained to assess for OSA in perioperative patients (38.2%) with significant differences noted by provider role (range 31-52%, q=0.001) and across the categories of practice (range 15-84%, q=0.001).Across all categories of practice, respondents indicated that they would like additional educational training about OSA (76.7%). This varied by clinical role (range 64-82%, q=0.003), but not categories of practice (range 73-84%, q=0.13). Furthermore, respondents indicated they also desired additional education about OSA in the perioperative patient (75.5%). This extended across all clinical roles (range 68-77%, q=0.09) and categories of practice (range 72-80%, q=0.09). Conclusion We found significant differences in APP and physician-in-training perceptions of the adequacy of their current training and desire for further OSA/perioperative OSA education. Our study identifies a critical gap and opportunity to improve provider understanding and patient care. Support (If Any) American Academy of Sleep Medicine Foundation (AASMF) award.