Sleep measurement and clinical impact in osteoarthritis and inflammatory arthritis: a scoping review

Clicks: 1
ID: 324794
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #170 of 197 articles by views in Lara D. Veeken

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 197 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To map how sleep has been assessed in osteoarthritis (OA) and/or inflammatory arthritis (IA), and to synthesise the evidence on the prevalence, characteristics, and relationships between sleep disturbances and these conditions. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following the JBI guidelines and reported it following the PRISMA extension guidelines for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO, grey literature sources, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. Using the RU-SATED framework, we categorised and narratively synthesised sleep dimensions and assessment methods, and tracked the clinical impact of sleep disturbances in OA and IA. RESULTS: 283 records (265 published studies; 18 registered trials) were included. They comprised 171 studies on IA, 77 on OA, and 17 on mixed populations, which were considered separately where appropriate. Sleep assessment methods varied across studies, favouring subjective over objective measurements. Studies primarily focused on sleep satisfaction, duration, efficiency, and sleepiness, overlooking regularity and timing. Global sleep disturbances were observed in ∼40-90% of OA and IA participants, with prevalence estimates varying substantially according to definitions, assessment methods, and study populations. A consistent pattern of discrepancies between subjective and objective sleep metrics was identified. CONCLUSION: Sleep disturbance is a prevalent and clinically significant feature of both OA and IA, yet it remains underrepresented in research and routine care. This review highlights substantial heterogeneity in sleep assessment and consistent discrepancies between subjective and objective measures. These findings support the need for standardised, multimethod approaches and for integrating sleep evaluation into rheumatology research and clinical guidelines.
Reference Key
openalex_W7202292571 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Annalisa De Lucia, Yeliz Prior, Gianluca Bertoni, Benedetto Giardulli, Filippo Recenti, Valeria Donisi, Cinzia Perlini, Richard Jones, Andrea Dell’Isola, Simone Battista
Journal Lara D. Veeken
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/rheumatology/keag412
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keag412
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.