ArticleCureus2025
Improving Sleep Quality on the First Postoperative Night in the Intensive Care Unit: A Quality Improvement Initiative.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Sleep disruption in critically ill patients is common and associated with delirium, immune dysfunction, and reduced quality of life. The first postoperative night in the intensive care unit (ICU) is particularly challenging due to pain, anxiety, and frequent care. No intervention has yet reliably improved sleep for this population. Methodology We conducted a quality improvement project with six Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles over seven months. Postoperative adult patients admitted before 21:00 were eligible, with exclusions for instability or factors precluding reliable self-report. The primary outcome was patient-reported sleep quality (1-10 scale) the morning after ICU admission. Secondary outcomes included nurse-perceived sleep quality, sleep quantity, and patient satisfaction. Balancing measures included nurse workload and adverse events. Control charts were used to assess variation. Interventions included staff engagement, earplugs/eye masks, standardized door closure, pain management review, noise monitoring, simplified surveillance protocols, and melatonin. Results A total of 69 patients were recruited (23 pre-interventions, 46 during interventions). Patient-reported sleep quality increased from 5.0 to 5.4/10 after culture shift promotion. Nurse-perceived sleep quality had a favorable special cause variation after streamlined surveillance protocols. No increase in workload or adverse events occurred. The initial survey identified intermittent pneumatic compression devices as sleep disruptors, and the interim analysis showed that an epidural was associated with poorer sleep. Conclusions A multimodal, low-cost sleep bundle modestly improved sleep without increasing staff burden. Periodic data analysis supported real-time adaptation and may benefit similar initiatives. Future work should explore sustainability and impact on recovery.
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.