ArticleBMC palliative care2018
Non-pharmacological solutions to sleep and circadian rhythm disruption: voiced bedside experiences of hospice and end-of-life staff caregivers.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Non-pharmacological interventions for sleep disturbances in people with dementia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of hospice care plus estazolam on sleep and psychological distress in advanced gastrointestinal cancer: a real-world observational study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Occupational therapists' role in sleep management in palliative care: A cross-sectional survey.The British journal of occupational therapy · 2025Article
- Effects of Chronic Oral Administration of Midazolam on Memory and Circadian Rhythms in Rats.Drug research · 2023Article
- Development and palliative care staff reactions to a sleep regulation educational intervention.BMC palliative care · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSleep disturbance is a significant issue, particularly for patients with advanced terminal illness. Currently, there are no practice-based recommended approaches for managing sleep and circadian disruptions in this population. To address this gap, a cross-sectional focus group study was performed engaging 32 staff members at four hospices/end-of-life programs in three demographically diverse counties in New York State.
methodsParticipants responded to structured open-ended questions. Responses were transcribed and subjected to qualitative content analysis. The themes and recommendations for improved practice that emerged were tabulated using Atlas TI qualitative software.
resultsThis report details the experiences of hospice and end-of-life care staff in managing sleep and circadian disruptions affecting patients and analyzes their recommendations for improving care. Caregivers involved in the study described potential interventions that would improve sleep and reduce circadian disruptions. They particularly highlighted a need for improved evaluation and monitoring systems, as well as sleep education programs for both formal and informal caregivers.
conclusionsThe voiced experiences of frontline hospice and end-of-life caregivers confirmed that disruption in sleep and circadian rhythms is a common issue for their patients and is not effectively addressed in current research and practice. The caregivers' recommendations focused on management strategies and underscored the need for well-tested interventions to promote sleep in patients receiving end-of-life care. Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of systematic programs that can be easily integrated into the end-of-life care process to attenuate sleep disturbances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.