Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective analysis identifies psychological resilience and factors in obstructive sleep apnea patients, suggesting targeted interventions may be beneficial.
Objective To ascertain the psychological resilience scores and pinpoint the influencing factors in untreated obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. Methods This retrospective cross-sectional study recruited OSA patients who initially consulted the otolaryngology department of Jiangsu Province Hospital and underwent polysomnography (PSG). The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) was administered to assess resilience levels. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from patients’ medical records. A generalized linear model (GLM) was employed to explore the factors influencing resilience among OSA patients. Results A total of 200 patients fulfilling the OSA diagnostic criteria were enrolled. PSG results indicated that 21 patients (10.5%) had mild OSA, 45 (22.5%) had moderate OSA, and 134 (67%) had severe OSA. Based on lowest oxygen saturation (LSaO2) levels, 28 patients (14%) experienced mild hypoxemia, 42 (21%) moderate hypoxemia, and 130 (65%) severe hypoxemia. Obese patients exhibited significantly elevated apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) values and reduced LSaO2 levels compared to overweight or normal-weight patients ( P < 0.01 for all comparisons). CD-RISC scores ranged from 29 to 98, with a mean of 64.63 ± 16.30. GLM analysis revealed marital status, disease duration, and AHI as independent factors influencing the psychological resilience of OSA patients. Conclusion The majority of OSA patients seeking initial medical attention exhibit severe conditions. Untreated OSA patients display lower psychological resilience scores. Marital status, duration of illness, and AHI are pivotal factors influencing the psychological resilience of these patients. These findings provide a scientific rationale for developing targeted psychological intervention strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: