Should I study or should I go (to sleep)? The influence of test schedule on the sleep behavior of undergraduates and its association with performance.

Sleep is crucial for college students' well-being. Although recommended sleep duration is between 7-9 hours per day, many students do not sleep that much. Scholar demands are among the causes of observed sleep deprivation in youth. We explored the influence of having a school test on previous night sleep in first-year students and the association of sleep duration and test performance. We ran two surveys in freshman students of the Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay: 1) 97 students of the School of Sciences who took the test at the same time; and 2) 252 School of Psychology students who took the test in four successive shifts. More than 1/2 of the participants (survey #1) and almost 1/3 (survey #2) reported short regular sleep duration (< 7h). In both samples, the sleep duration of the night before the test was reduced with respect to regular nights (survey #1: 2.1 ± 0.2 h, p < 0.001; survey #2: between 1.7 ± 0.4 h and 3.6 ± 0.3 h, all p < 0.001), with more than 10% of the students who did not sleep at all. In survey 2, sleep duration increased in later shifts (F (3,248) = 4.6, p = 0.004). Using logit regressions, we confirmed that sleep duration was positively related to test scores in both samples (survey #1: exp B = 1.15, p < 0.001; pseudo-R2 = 0.38; survey #2: exp B = 1.03, p < 0.001; pseudo-R2 = 0.25). Delaying test start time may prevent the reduction in sleep duration, which may also improve school performance. In addition, educational policies should include information for students about the impact of sleep on learning and of the consequences of reduced sleep duration.

Satisfaction and expectations of patients with inflammatory bowel disease on biologic therapy: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The satisfaction perceived by patients with chronic diseases affects clinical outcomes and healthcare costs. Some patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) develop a more severe form requiring biologic therapy. We assessed the quality of care perceived by IBD patients in dedicated centers. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter study enrolled consecutive IBD patients who underwent biologic therapy in the participating centers. The nurses directly involved in the management of these patients explained the rationale of the survey, provided a specific questionnaire (CACHE), and collected data. The CACHE included 31 items structured in 6 domains: staff care, clinician care, center facilities, patient information, accessibility, and patient support. Patients' satisfaction score for each domain ranged from 0 to 100%. RESULTS: Sixteen different Italian centers participated and a total of 450 patients were enrolled (283 with Crohn's disease and 167 with ulcerative colitis). The overall score was 82.2±19.6, satisfaction with the clinicians care scoring the highest (87.6±3.2) and the information provided to the patient scoring the lowest (70.7±7.9). More specifically, it emerged that 5.2-19.5% of patients were unsatisfied with: 1) the communication between the IBD medical team and primary care physicians; 2) information received about the disease or patients' associations; and 3) the accessibility of the center. CONCLUSION: Although our data revealed an acceptably high rate of global satisfaction among IBD patients receiving biologic therapy, more effort should be made to improve patient information and communication between IBD teams, other specialists and primary care physicians.