Sleep and Sensory Reactivity in the School-Aged Children

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Research Question
Sleep Dynamics
Methodology
Discussion
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Since the change in three domains revolves around the physical, cognitive, and psychological, development is multidimensional. Although the stage theories of Freud, Erikson, Piaget, and Kohlberg (also known as theorists of development) consider development as discontinuous progress, lifespan theorists are aware that development may be perceived and assessed in several ways (Berk, 2019). Other theories, like behaviorists, Vygotsky, and others who focus on information processing, believe that growth occurs across time and is known as continuous development. The central nervous system’s ability to process and respond adaptively to environmental cues brought in by sensory systems is known as sensory processing (Chen et al., 2019). However, it may be a sign of sensory processing issues, such as sensory sensitivity and reactivity, when sensory processing fails to produce an effective or appropriate response to registered stimuli (Berk, 2019). The research will analyze rest quality for toddlers and the optimal frequency.

Research Question

What durations and frequencies of rest are optimal for toddlers?

Sleep Dynamics

Although the understanding of the structure and regulation of sleep is still limited, it is widely accepted that healthy sleep which includes getting enough sleep—is essential for a better health and wellbeing. The anaysis is based on studies with small samples that are synchronized to establish the dynamism of sleep patterns. In research that contained 56 children aged eight conducted in 2009, Berk found that particular sensory reactivity, such as tactile sensitivity, movement sensitivity, auditory filtering, and total sensory processing scores, were inversely connected with sleep. More recently, several studies have suggested that poor sleep habits in children between the ages of 6 months and 2.5 years (n = 160), as well as in primary school children between the ages of 7 and 8 and 12 (n = 45; n = 231), may also negatively affect sensory processing outcomes (Berk, 2019). These studies included children between 0 and 36 months (n = 177) and children between the ages of 6 months and 2.5 years (n = 160) (Berk, 2019Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between sleep (duration and quality) and sensory reactivity in a sample of Spanish school-aged children with normal development.

Methodology

The research is a cross-sectional population-based study conducted in Alicante, Spain, on normally developing kids between the ages of 3 and 7. Approximately 1,700 eligible kids were chosen at random from 21 Alicante-area schools (Berk, 2019). They received an envelope with an invitation letter to their parents inviting them to participate in the study. Children were removed from the trial if they displayed any handicap after around two or three weeks and after all the paperwork was reviewed. As a result, the research analysis did not include children with allergic disorders (n = 6), atopic dermatitis (n = 1), asthma (n = 1), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (n = 1), tumors (n = 1), ASD (n = 1), or ADHD (n = 1). Finally, 620 kids were included in the sample, giving a response rate of roughly 37%. Participants in the research were recruited from February to May 2016. All the kids who eventually participated in the study completed informed consent forms with their parents (Berk, 2019). The Miguel Hernandez University of Elche’s Ethical Committee approved the conduct of this study (DPC.ASP.02.16). Five hundred seventy-nine children (93.4%) were used in the analysis because they had complete data for the key research variables.

Discussion

Overall SSP, tactile sensitivity, ﬂavor sensitivity, under-responsive/seek feeling, auditory filtering, low energy/weak, and visual/auditory sensitivity SSP subscales were all substantially correlated with a higher incidence of sensory reactivity in children aged 3–7 (Bjørnestad & Os, 2018). However, no statistically significant relationships between sleep duration and the frequency of sensory reactivity in kids in this age range were found. This connection has never been mentioned or investigated in a population-based study of school-age children. Sensory processing problems and sleep disturbances are frequent symptoms in kids with developmental impairments like ASD, according to a prior study (Sipple et al., 2020). However, there is only very limited information about the connection between children’s sensory processing difficulties and sleep outcomes, and it is based primarily on preliminary findings from descriptive analyses.

The daily average of hours of sleep was strikingly identical among children categorized as having or not having sensory reactivity (9.8 and 9.9 h/day, respectively) but consistent with past findings, which may be related to sleep length was relatively homogeneous overall (Berk, 2019).

Although the PSQ is not the best tool for evaluating sleep quality in children, it is a suitable tool for epidemiological research. It can help categorize kids at risk of sleep disturbance because this questionnaire was specifically designed for detecting sleep-related breathing disorders. To evaluate relationships with sensory reactivity, the PSQ enabled us to categorize children as a group at risk (i.e., children with sleep disorders) (Berk, 2019). Therefore, in terms of study, the PSQ score is a good proxy for evaluating children’s sleep quality. In addition, we used numerous statistical models to examine the data after adjusting for potential confounding factors. However, there may be bias or residual confounding due to missing data. Finally, we performed several sensitivity analyses to investigate the impact of distinct circumstances that could be connected to the kids’ sensory processing to test the robustness of our findings.

Conclusion

In this population-based investigation, which included children ages 3 to 7, we found a statistically significant correlation between poor sleep quality and a greater incidence of sensory reactivity as assessed by the overall SSP and nearly all SSP subscales. This is the first time, to our knowledge, that this link has been investigated and published. Even though there was no correlation between sleep length and sensory reactivity, further research into the connection between sleep deprivation and sensory processing outcomes is necessary, given the potential negative implications on children’s health and wellbeing. Our results offer compelling evidence based on an epidemiological approach. They are consistent with early findings of a possible relationship between sleep and sensory processing functioning, pending future investigation from prospective studies. The interaction of these elements should be considered in therapies expressly designed to improve sleep disruptions or sensory processing difficulties in children as a possible negative determinant that may adversely affect children’s health and normal development.

References

Berk, L. E. (2019). Development through the lifespan (7th Ed.). Pearson.

Bichay-Awadalla, K., & Bulotsky-Shearer, R. J. (2021). Examining the factor structure of the Classroom Assessment Scoring System Toddler (class-T) in early head start and subsidized childcare classrooms. Early Education and Development, 33(2), 309–325. Web.

Bjørnestad, E., & Os, E. (2017). Quality in Norwegian childcare for toddlers using ITERS-R. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26(1), 111–127. Web.

Chen, L.-W., Fung, S., Fok, D., Leong, L., Toh, J., Lim, H., Pang, W., Tan, K., Chong, Y.-S., Yap, F., Godfrey, K., Lee, Y., & Chong, M. (2019). The development and evaluation of a Diet Quality index for Asian toddlers and its perinatal correlates: The Gusto Cohort Study. Nutrients, 11(3), 535. Web.

Sipple, J. W., McCabe, L. A., & Casto, H. G. (2020). Childcare deserts in New York State: Prekindergarten implementation and community factors related to the capacity to care for infants and toddlers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 51, 167–177. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!