Skip to main content

Table 4 Sleep and presenteeism outcomes for each study included in the systematic review

From: A systematic review of the effect of sleep interventions on presenteeism

Study Intervention Sleep outcomes Presenteeism outcomes Statistical significance (Presenteeism) Risk of bias (Cochrane Collaboration’s tool) Risk of bias (ROBINS-I)
Bostock et al. (2016) [16] CBT-I (Digital cognitive behavioral therapy: Sleepio)
Intervention vs. control
SCI WPAI F (1, 485) = 10.99, p < 0.001, d = 0.67 Low risk of bias: 4/7
High risk of bias: 0/7
Unclear risk of bias: 3/7
N/A
Espie et al. (2018) [11] CBT-I (Digital cognitive behavioral therapy: Sleepio)
Pre vs. post
SCI WPAI t (87) = 4.83, p < 0.01 N/A Critical
Behrendt et al. (2020) [29] Internet-delivered CBT-I
Intervention vs. control
ISI Self-report of the number of days in the past 3 months that work efficiency has decreased due to ill health Posttreatment
N/A
6-months follow-up
mean difference between groups = −6.455, p < 0.001, d = 0.83
Low risk of bias: 3/7
High risk of bias: 3/7
Unclear risk of bias: 1/7
N/A
Burton et al. (2016) [17] Sleep hygiene education
Pre vs. post
Mayo Clinic tool WLQ
Time-management demands
Physical demands
Mental-interpersonal demands
Output demands
Overall
No description of the coefficient of the chi-square test
Time-management demands
p < 0.001
Physical demands
n.s.
Mental-interpersonal demands
p < 0.001
Output demands
p < 0.001
Overall
p < 0.001
N/A Critical
Wolever et al. (2012) [30] Yoga
Mindfulness
Intervention vs. control
PSQI WLQ (overall) F (2, 233) = 2.07, n.s., η2 = 0.02 Low risk of bias: 2/7
High risk of bias: 0/7
Unclear risk of bias: 5/7
N/A
Morgan et al. (2012) [31] The workplace power program
Intervention vs. control
ESS WLQ
Time-management demands
Physical demands
Mental-interpersonal demands
Output demands
Overall
Time-management demands
mean difference between groups is 7.7, p = 0.20, d = 0.37
Physical demands
mean difference between groups is 9.8, p = 0.04, d = 0.41
Mental-interpersonal demands
mean difference between groups is 5.0, p = 0.11, d = 0.35
Output demands
mean difference between groups is 6.1, p = 0.23, d = 0.29
Overall
mean difference between groups is 2.0, p = 0.01, d = 0.56
Low risk of bias: 4/7
High risk of bias: 1/7
Unclear risk of bias: 2/7
N/A
Mills et al. (2007) [32] Changing the color temperature of fluorescent lights in the workplace (17,000 K vs. 2900 K)
Intervention vs. control
Pre vs. post
Item 9 of Columbia Jet Lag Scale (sleepiness during the day) WHO-HPQ Overall
t (67) = −2.72, n.s.
Intervention change
t (45) = − 6.07, p < 0.001
Control change
t (22) = − 1.16, n.s.
N/A Serious
  1. ROBINS-I Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions, CBT-I Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, SCI Sleep Condition Indicator, WPAI Work Productivity and Impairment questionnaire, N/A Not applicable, ISI Insomnia Severity Index, WLQ Work Limitation Questionnaire, n.s. not significant, PSQI Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, ESS Epworth Sleepiness Scale, WHO-HPQ World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire