Search

Background: The association between nighttime sleep disturbance and daytime sleepiness remains unclear. This study aimed to examine the relationships between various domains of nighttime sleep disturbance, daytime sleepiness, and their specific dimensions. Methods: This was a community‐based cross‐sectional study. The participants were adults aged 65 years and older from Yilan City, Taiwan. Daytime sleepiness (DS) was defined using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) with scores ≥ 11. The ESS dimensions were further examined using exploratory factor analysis. The highest 15% factor scores for each factor were defined as factor‐specific DS. Various domains of nighttime sleep disturbance were assessed using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine the independent relationships among various nighttime sleep disturbances, ESS, and its dimensions. Results: Of the 2585 participants, a total of 59.0% were women. Two factors were identified by exploratory factor analysis and were designated as 'passive factor' and 'active factor'. Multiple logistic regression analyses elucidated that short sleep duration was a common risk indicator for ESS‐defined (odds ratio (OR): 2.01; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.43–2.83), passive factor‐defined (OR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1.65–3.00), and active factor‐defined DS (OR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.07–2.00). Hypnotic use was associated with a lower risk of both ESS‐defined (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.47–0.92) and passive factor‐defined DS (OR:0.69, 95% CI: 0.52–0.92). Bathroom use (OR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.04–1.91), coughing or snoring (OR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.01–4.56), and sleep efficiency (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.31–0.57) were uniquely associated with active factor‐defined DS. Conclusion: Two factors were identified in the ESS, revealing factor‐specific correlates of DS. Specifically, ESS‐ and passive factor‐defined DS shared similar correlates. In contrast, some correlates seem unique to active‐factor‐defined DS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study investigated the impact of different levels of COVID‐19 social restrictions (social distancing in 2020, large‐scale home confinement in 2021) on myopia prevalence and behaviours in a preschool population with school‐based eyecare programme. Methods: Repeated cross‐sectional surveys were conducted between August and December in 2019, 2020 and 2021. Children aged 5–6 years received ocular examinations, and questionnaires were answered by caregivers before the day of the examination. The main outcome measures were the changes in after‐school time spent on homework, screen‐based devices and outdoors. Secondary outcome was the change in myopia prevalence (spherical equivalent [SE] ≤ −0.5 D in either eye after cycloplegia). Results: A total of 9997 preschoolers were included in the analysis. Under tighter restrictions, more preschoolers spent ≥1 h/day on screen‐based devices (42.8% in 2019, 45.2% in 2020, 48.9% in 2021, p < 0.001), and fewer preschoolers spent ≥30 min/day on after‐school outdoor activities (49.5% in 2019, 46.0% in 2020, 41.0% in 2021, p < 0.001) on weekdays. A similar trend was found on weekends. While more preschoolers spent ≥2 h/day on screen‐based devices (35.3% in 2019, 38.5% in 2020, 43.0% in 2021, p < 0.001), fewer preschoolers spent ≥2 h/day on outdoor activities (41.7% in 2019, 41.7% in 2020, 34.0% in 2021, p < 0.001). The mean SE and myopia prevalence were stable (9.1% in 2019, 10.3% in 2020, 9.4% in 2021, p = 0.707). Conclusion: Our study showed dose‐dependent effect of social restrictions on near‐work and outdoor behaviours at home. The prevalence of myopia did not increase significantly with short‐term cessation of school‐based eyecare programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]