STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relative contributions of the homeostatic and circadian processes on sleep regulation under conditions of severe sleep restriction. DESIGN: The 13-day laboratory based study consisted of 3 × 24-h baseline days (8 h sleep opportunity, 16 h wake) followed by 7 × 28-h forced desynchrony days (4.7 h sleep opportunity, 23.3 h wake). SETTING: The study was conducted in a time isolation unit at the Centre for Sleep Research, University of South Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen healthy, nonsmoking males, aged 21.8 ± 3.8 (mean ± SD) years participated in the study. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MEASUREMENTS: Sleep was measured using standard polysomnography. Core body temperature (CBT) was recorded continuously using a rectal thermistor. Each epoch of sleep was assigned a circadian phase based on the CBT data (6 × 60-degree bins) and an elapsed time into sleep episode (2 × 140-min intervals). RESULTS: The percentage of SWS decreased with elapsed time into the sleep episode. However, no change in the percentage of REM sleep was observed with sleep progression. Whilst there was a circadian modulation of REM sleep, the amplitude of the circadian variation was smaller than expected. Sleep efficiency remained high throughout the sleep episode and across all circadian phases. CONCLUSIONS: Previous forced desynchrony studies have demonstrated a strong circadian influence on sleep, in the absence of sleep restriction. The current study suggests that in the presence of high homeostatic pressure, the circadian modulation of sleep, in particular sleep efficiency and to a lesser extent, REM sleep, are reduced.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relative contributions of the homeostatic and circadian processes on sleep regulation under conditions of severe sleep restriction. DESIGN: The 13-day laboratory based study consisted of 3 × 24-h baseline days (8 h sleep opportunity, 16 h wake) followed by 7 × 28-h forced desynchrony days (4.7 h sleep opportunity, 23.3 h wake). SETTING: The study was conducted in a time isolation unit at the Centre for Sleep Research, University of South Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen healthy, nonsmoking males, aged 21.8 ± 3.8 (mean ± SD) years participated in the study. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MEASUREMENTS: Sleep was measured using standard polysomnography. Core body temperature (CBT) was recorded continuously using a rectal thermistor. Each epoch of sleep was assigned a circadian phase based on the CBT data (6 × 60-degree bins) and an elapsed time into sleep episode (2 × 140-min intervals). RESULTS: The percentage of SWS decreased with elapsed time into the sleep episode. However, no change in the percentage of REM sleep was observed with sleep progression. Whilst there was a circadian modulation of REM sleep, the amplitude of the circadian variation was smaller than expected. Sleep efficiency remained high throughout the sleep episode and across all circadian phases. CONCLUSIONS: Previous forced desynchrony studies have demonstrated a strong circadian influence on sleep, in the absence of sleep restriction. The current study suggests that in the presence of high homeostatic pressure, the circadian modulation of sleep, in particular sleep efficiency and to a lesser extent, REM sleep, are reduced.
Entities:
Keywords:
Homeostatic; REM sleep; circadian; sleep restriction; slow wave sleep
Authors: J Waterhouse; D Weinert; D Minors; S Folkard; D Owens; G Atkinson; I Macdonald; N Sytnik; P Tucker; T Reilly Journal: Chronobiol Int Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 2.877
Authors: T Hori; Y Sugita; E Koga; S Shirakawa; K Inoue; S Uchida; H Kuwahara; M Kousaka; T Kobayashi; Y Tsuji; M Terashima; K Fukuda; N Fukuda Journal: Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 5.188
Authors: Gregory Belenky; Nancy J Wesensten; David R Thorne; Maria L Thomas; Helen C Sing; Daniel P Redmond; Michael B Russo; Thomas J Balkin Journal: J Sleep Res Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 3.981
Authors: David Darwent; Sally A Ferguson; Charli Sargent; Gemma M Paech; Louise Williams; Xuan Zhou; Raymond W Matthews; Drew Dawson; David J Kennaway; Greg D Roach Journal: Chronobiol Int Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 2.877
Authors: Daniel A Cohen; Wei Wang; James K Wyatt; Richard E Kronauer; Derk-Jan Dijk; Charles A Czeisler; Elizabeth B Klerman Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2010-01-13 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Xuan Zhou; Sally A Ferguson; Raymond W Matthews; Charli Sargent; David Darwent; David J Kennaway; Gregory D Roach Journal: Sleep Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: C A Czeisler; J F Duffy; T L Shanahan; E N Brown; J F Mitchell; D W Rimmer; J M Ronda; E J Silva; J S Allan; J S Emens; D J Dijk; R E Kronauer Journal: Science Date: 1999-06-25 Impact factor: 47.728