Broken Windows, Broken Zzs

Poor Housing and Neighborhood Conditions Are Associated with Objective Measures of Sleep Health

Published in: Journal of Urban Health, Volume 97, pages 230–238 (January 2020). doi: 10.1007/s11524-019-00418-5

Posted on RAND.org on April 29, 2020

by Wendy M. Troxel, Ann C. Haas, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, Stephanie Brooks Holliday, Andrea Richardson, Heather L. Schwartz, Tiffany L. Gary-Webb, Lauren Hale, Daniel J. Buysse, Matthew Buman, et al.

Read More

Access further information on this document at Journal of Urban Health

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

African Americans and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals have higher rates of a variety of sleep disturbances, including short sleep duration, poor sleep quality, and fragmented sleep. Such sleep disturbances may contribute to pervasive and widening racial and socioeconomic (SES) disparities in health. A growing body of literature demonstrates that over and above individual-level SES, indicators of neighborhood disadvantage are associated with poor sleep. However, there has been scant investigation of the association between sleep and the most proximal environments, the home and residential block. This is the first study to examine the association between objective and self-reported measures of housing and block conditions and sleep. The sample included 634 adults (mean age = 58.7 years; 95% African American) from two low-income urban neighborhoods. Study participants reported whether they experienced problems with any of seven different housing problems (e.g., broken windows) and rated the overall condition of their home. Trained data collectors rated residential block quality. Seven days of wrist actigraphy were used to measure average sleep duration, efficiency, and wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO), and a sleep diary assessed sleep quality. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted for each sleep outcome with housing or block conditions as predictors in separate models. Participants reporting "fair" or "poor" housing conditions had an adjusted average sleep duration that was 15.4 min shorter than that of participants reporting "good" or "excellent" conditions. Those reporting any home distress had 15.9 min shorter sleep and .19 units lower mean sleep quality as compared with participants who did not report home distress. Poor objectively measured block quality was associated with 14.0 min shorter sleep duration, 1.95% lower sleep efficiency, and 10.7 additional minutes of WASO. Adverse housing and proximal neighborhood conditions are independently associated with poor sleep health. Findings highlight the importance of considering strategies that target upstream determinants of sleep health disparities.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.