SynthesisJournal of clinical nursing2025
Non-Pharmacological Sleep Interventions after Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mental Health Promotion Through Nursing Interventions Focused on Anxiety, Sleep and Well-Being: A Scoping Review.International journal of mental health nursing · 2026Article
- Causes and Effects of Postoperative Sleep Disorders and Treatment Strategies for Preoperative, Intraoperative, and Postoperative Settings-A Narrative Review.Clocks & sleep · 2025Review
- Beyond the beats: exploring the link between blood pressure fluctuations with anxiety, depression, and sleep.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo synthesise up-to-date research evidence for non-pharmacological interventions to improve various sleep outcomes (e.g., sleep quality, duration) in postsurgical cardiac patients.
backgroundSleep disturbances are common amongst postsurgical cardiac patients, yet the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in improving various sleep outcomes has not been comprehensively reviewed.
designA systematic review and meta-analysis guided by the PRISMA protocol.
methodsCINAHL, PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant research in May 2023. Included studies used a randomised controlled trial design that applied a non-pharmacological intervention for postsurgical cardiac patients and reported sleep as an outcome. For the meta-analysis, mean effect sizes were separately calculated for studies with regular and reverse-scored scales.
resultsOf 37 studies included, the most common cardiac surgery was coronary artery bypass graft. Most interventions were performed within the first postoperative week and assessed sleep quality outcomes using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. The interventions are categorised into five types. Human resource-based strategies emerged as the most effective. The meta-analysis of 27 eligible studies showed a mean effect size of 0.76 for studies with regular scoring scales and - 1.04 for those with reverse-scored scales, indicating medium to large effect sizes.
conclusionOur findings provide strong evidence that non-pharmacological interventions, particularly human resource-based strategies, significantly improve sleep quality in postsurgical cardiac patients. The medium to large effect sizes underscore the clinical significance of these findings. IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare professionals should consider incorporating non-pharmacological interventions, especially human resource-based strategies, in care plans for postsurgical cardiac patients to improve sleep outcomes and promote recovery. These interventions should be tailored to individual physical and cultural differences for maximum effectiveness. Future research should evaluate the long-term effects of these interventions on various sleep outcomes, using both objective and subjective measures to provide a comprehensive assessment of their efficacy. REPORTING
methodThis study adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public contributions were not required for this review.
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.