Introduction The positional adjustment of the sleep surface, such as inclining the upper body and/or legs, can potentially contribute to better sleep and alleviation of discomfort associated with a variety of physical problems. This study compared sleep on a recliner designed for sleep to participants’ prior sleep on their original sleeping surface. Methods Adults (78% female, ages 29-73, mean age=47) who reported already sleeping at least part of the night on a recliner, chair, or sofa, participated in a 6-week field study, using a pre-post intervention design. During the 3-week baseline period, participants slept at home in their usual environment. During the 3-week intervention period, they slept on the Zecliner at home. This recliner enables users to tailor the sleep surface to their preferences by adjusting the position of the upper body and legs. Sleep was measured objectively using a PSG-validated, non-contact biomotion device, SleepScore Max, every night and by daily and pre-post self-report. Multilevel regression and paired t-tests were used to test for statistical significance. Results There were 708 nights of data across 23 participants. While objectively measured sleep did not improve, pre-post analyses revealed increases in self-reported sleep quality (+121%) and feeling well rested in the morning (+119%) compared to baseline (all ps<.001). Satisfaction with sleep and feeling well-rested in the morning increased from 1 to 4 days per week on average (all ps<.001). Also, increases in ratings of comfort (+107%), pressure relief (+240%), sense of weightlessness (+327%), and feeling cool (+180%) were observed compared to baseline (all ps<.001). Conclusion Perceived sleep quality at night and feeling well-rested in the morning improved when sleeping on the recliner compared to baseline, likely because the intervention was perceived as more comfortable. Findings highlight the importance of adjustable sleep surfaces in promoting satisfaction with sleep. Support (if any) Flexsteel
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ledesma et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: