Suzanne Ftouni1, Tracey L Sletten1, Christian L Nicholas2, David J Kennaway3, Steven W Lockley1,4,5, Shantha M W Rajaratnam1,4,5. 1. School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia. 2. Sleep Research Laboratory, Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Robinson Research Institute, School of Paediatrics and Reproductive Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 4. Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders, Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Division of Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The study examined the relationship between the circadian rhythm of 6-sulphatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) and ocular measures of sleepiness and neurobehavioral performance in shift workers undergoing a simulated night shift. METHODS: Twenty-two shift workers (mean age 33.4, SD 11.8 years) were tested at approximately the beginning (20:00) and the end (05:55) of a simulated night shift in the laboratory. At the time point corresponding to the end of the simulated shift, 14 participants were classified as being within range of 6-sulphatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) acrophase--defined as 3 hours before or after aMT6s peak--and 8 were classified as outside aMT6s acrophase range. Participants completed the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) and the auditory psychomotor vigilance task (aPVT). Waking electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded and infrared reflectance oculography was used to collect ocular measures of sleepiness: positive and negative amplitude/velocity ratio (PosAVR, NegAVR), mean blink total duration (BTD), the percentage of eye closure (%TEC), and a composite score of sleepiness levels (Johns Drowsiness Scale; JDS). RESULTS: Participants who were tested within aMT6s acrophase range displayed higher levels of sleepiness on ocular measures (%TEC, BTD, PosAVR, JDS), objective sleepiness (EEG delta power frequency band), subjective ratings of sleepiness, and neurobehavioral performance, compared to those who were outside aMT6s acrophase range. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that objective ocular measures of sleepiness are sensitive to circadian rhythm misalignment in shift workers.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The study examined the relationship between the circadian rhythm of 6-sulphatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) and ocular measures of sleepiness and neurobehavioral performance in shift workers undergoing a simulated night shift. METHODS: Twenty-two shift workers (mean age 33.4, SD 11.8 years) were tested at approximately the beginning (20:00) and the end (05:55) of a simulated night shift in the laboratory. At the time point corresponding to the end of the simulated shift, 14 participants were classified as being within range of 6-sulphatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) acrophase--defined as 3 hours before or after aMT6s peak--and 8 were classified as outside aMT6s acrophase range. Participants completed the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) and the auditory psychomotor vigilance task (aPVT). Waking electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded and infrared reflectance oculography was used to collect ocular measures of sleepiness: positive and negative amplitude/velocity ratio (PosAVR, NegAVR), mean blink total duration (BTD), the percentage of eye closure (%TEC), and a composite score of sleepiness levels (Johns Drowsiness Scale; JDS). RESULTS:Participants who were tested within aMT6s acrophase range displayed higher levels of sleepiness on ocular measures (%TEC, BTD, PosAVR, JDS), objective sleepiness (EEG delta power frequency band), subjective ratings of sleepiness, and neurobehavioral performance, compared to those who were outside aMT6s acrophase range. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that objective ocular measures of sleepiness are sensitive to circadian rhythm misalignment in shift workers.
Authors: Parisa Vidafar; Joshua J Gooley; Angus C Burns; Shantha M W Rajaratnam; Melanie Rueger; Eliza Van Reen; Charles A Czeisler; Steven W Lockley; Sean W Cain Journal: Sleep Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Julia E Stone; Tracey L Sletten; Michelle Magee; Saranea Ganesan; Megan D Mulhall; Allison Collins; Mark Howard; Steven W Lockley; Shantha M W Rajaratnam Journal: J Physiol Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Saranea Ganesan; Michelle Magee; Julia E Stone; Megan D Mulhall; Allison Collins; Mark E Howard; Steven W Lockley; Shantha M W Rajaratnam; Tracey L Sletten Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-03-15 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Julia E Stone; Xavier L Aubert; Henning Maass; Andrew J K Phillips; Michelle Magee; Mark E Howard; Steven W Lockley; Shantha M W Rajaratnam; Tracey L Sletten Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-07-30 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Julia E Stone; Andrew J K Phillips; Suzanne Ftouni; Michelle Magee; Mark Howard; Steven W Lockley; Tracey L Sletten; Clare Anderson; Shantha M W Rajaratnam; Svetlana Postnova Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-07-29 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Tracey L Sletten; Jason P Sullivan; Josephine Arendt; Lawrence A Palinkas; Laura K Barger; Lloyd Fletcher; Malcolm Arnold; Jan Wallace; Clive Strauss; Richard J S Baker; Kate Kloza; David J Kennaway; Shantha M W Rajaratnam; Jeff Ayton; Steven W Lockley Journal: J Pineal Res Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 12.081