The viability of an ecologically valid chronic sleep restriction and circadian timing protocol: An examination of sample attrition, compliance, and effectiveness at impacting sleepiness and mood.
The viability of an ecologically valid chronic sleep restriction and circadian timing protocol: An examination of sample attrition, compliance, and effectiveness at impacting sleepiness and mood.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0174367
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
McElroy T
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dickinson DL;Drummond SP;McElroy T
慢性睡眠限制(SR)会增加困倦，对情绪产生负面影响，并损害各种认知表现指标。建立这些效应的绝大多数工作都是严格控制的实验室实验研究。在自然主义环境中检查通常经验的SR水平更加困难，通常涉及观察方法，而不是对睡眠的主动操纵。同样的道理也适用于分析昼夜节律不佳时的行为和认知结果。目前的研究测试了居家协议操纵睡眠时间表(即强加SR)的能力，以及在受试者的昼夜节律偏好和测试时间之间造成不匹配的能力。该方案的可行性通过完成性、对SR的遵从性以及在控制嗜睡和情绪方面的成功来评估。3630人完成了一项在线调查，以评估初始资格，256人通过电子邮件回复同意参与为期3周的研究，221人参加了最初的面对面会议，184人完成了方案(175人有完整的数据)。方案包括1周的居家SR(床上5-6小时/晚)、1周的洗涤和1周的良好休息(WR：8-9小时/晚)。睡眠监测通过活动记录仪、日记和电话记录来进行。为确保受试者安全，实施了风险管理策略。在每个实验周结束时，受试者报告困倦和情绪评分。礼仪完成率为83%，抑郁得分较低，焦虑得分较高，晨间作业预示着完成。对睡眠时间表的遵从性也非常好。与WR相比，受试者每晚在床上的时间减少了约2小时，平均每晚睡眠时间减少了1.5小时，82%的受试者平均每晚睡眠时间至少减少了60分钟。昏昏欲睡和情绪也受到了SR的预期影响。这些发现表明，假设采取了适当的安全预防措施，在实验室外研究实验性慢性睡眠限制是可行的，从而使研究人员能够显著提高生态有效性，而不是严格控制的实验室内研究。
Chronic sleep restriction (SR) increases sleepiness, negatively impacts mood, and impairs a variety of cognitive performance measures. The vast majority of work establishing these effects are tightly controlled in-lab experimental studies. Examining commonly-experienced levels of SR in naturalistic settings is more difficult and generally involves observational methods, rather than active manipulations of sleep. The same is true for analyzing behavioral and cognitive outcomes at circadian unfavorable times. The current study tested the ability of an at-home protocol to manipulate sleep schedules (i.e., impose SR), as well as create a mismatch between a subject’s circadian preference and time of testing. Viability of the protocol was assessed via completion, compliance with the SR, and success at manipulating sleepiness and mood. An online survey was completed by 3630 individuals to assess initial eligibility, 256 agreed via email response to participate in the 3-week study, 221 showed for the initial in-person session, and 184 completed the protocol (175 with complete data). The protocol consisted of 1 week at-home SR (5-6 hours in bed/night), 1 week wash-out, and 1 week well-rested (WR: 8-9 hours in bed/night). Sleep was monitored with actigraphy, diary, and call-ins. Risk management strategies were implemented for subject safety. At the end of each experimental week, subjects reported sleepiness and mood ratings. Protocol completion was 83%, with lower depression scores, higher anxiety scores, and morning session assignment predicting completion. Compliance with the sleep schedule was also very good. Subjects spent approximately 2 hours less time in bed/night and obtained an average of 1.5 hours less nightly sleep during SR, relative to WR, with 82% of subjects obtaining at least 60 minutes less average nightly sleep. Sleepiness and mood were impacted as expected by SR. These findings show the viability of studying experimental chronic sleep restriction outside the laboratory, assuming appropriate safety precautions are taken, thus allowing investigators to significantly increase ecological validity over strictly controlled in-lab studies.