Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional study investigates sleep quality categories and factors in night-shift nurses, suggesting targeted interventions.
Objective This study aimed to investigate the potential categories of sleep quality in shift nurses using latent profile analysis, and to explore the characteristics and associated factors of sleep quality in each category. Methods Convenience sampling was used to select 1,650 shift nurses from four tertiary A-level hospitals from May to June 2025. Data were collected using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the sleep chronotype questionnaire, the perceived stress scale, and a general demographic questionnaire. Latent profile analysis was conducted to determine the latent categories of sleep quality. Univariate and multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the associated factors of different sleep quality categories. A total of 1,650 questionnaires were distributed, of which 1,608 were valid, yielding a valid response rate of 97.5%. Results The mean PSQI score among shift nurses was 7.23 ± 3.16 points, indicating overall sleep problems within this group. The sleep quality of night-shift nurses was categorized into four latent profiles: “good sleep quality” (44.4%), “moderate sleep quality” (40.7%), “sleep disorder–low sleeping pills” (9.6%), and “sleep disorder–high sleeping pills” (5.3%). A multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that several factors were significantly associated with these sleep quality profiles. These factors included perceived stress, sleep chronotype, monthly night shifts, weekly working hours, age, and years of nursing experience, and marital status ( p < 0.05). Conclusion The sleep quality of shift-working nurses varies significantly. Nursing administrators should develop tailored management strategies and adopt targeted sleep interventions based on the identified patterns in nurses’ sleep quality to improve their overall sleep quality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: