| Literature DB >> 29543731 |
Minqi Yang1,2, Ning Ma3,4, Yingying Zhu5, Ying-Chu Su6, Qingwei Chen7, Fan-Chi Hsiao8, Yanran Ji9, Chien-Ming Yang10,11, Guofu Zhou12,13,14.
Abstract
Exposure to bright light is typically intermittent in our daily life. However, the acute effects of intermittent light on alertness and sleep have seldom been explored. To investigate this issue, we employed within-subject design and compared the effects of three light conditions: intermittent bright light (30-min pulse of blue-enriched bright light (~1000 lux, ~6000 K) alternating with 30-min dim normal light (~5 lux, ~3600 K) three times); continuous bright light; and continuous dim light on subjective and objective alertness and subsequent sleep structure. Each light exposure was conducted during the three hours before bedtime. Fifteen healthy volunteers (20 ± 3.4 years; seven males) were scheduled to stay in the sleep laboratory for four separated nights (one for adaptation and the others for the light exposures) with a period of at least one week between nights. The results showed that when compared with dim light, both intermittent light and continuous bright light significantly increased subjective alertness and decreased sleep efficiency (SE) and total sleep time (TST). Intermittent light significantly increased objective alertness than dim light did during the second half of the light-exposure period. Our results suggested that intermittent light was as effective as continuous bright light in their acute effects in enhancing subjective and objective alertness and in negatively impacting subsequent sleep.Entities:
Keywords: acute effects; alertness; continuous light; dim light; intermittent light; sleep structure
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29543731 PMCID: PMC5877069 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15030524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Spectral power distribution of the two light sources (bright light and dim light).
Spectrally weighted α-opic illuminance levels for each lighting condition.
| Sensitivity | λmax (nm) | α-Opic Lux Value (~5 Lux) | α-Opic Lux Value (~1000 Lux) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Melanopsin | 480.0 | 2.27 | 870.70 |
| S-cone | 419.0 | 1.46 | 911.50 |
| M-cone | 530.8 | 3.98 | 939.15 |
| L-cone | 558.4 | 4.45 | 920.03 |
| Rods | 496.3 | 2.92 | 903.13 |
Note: the five α-opic irradiances were determined by using the calculation toolbox developed by Lucas et al., (2014) [42].
Figure 2Study protocol. The timing of assessments in each laboratory session are shown in the figure. In the intermittent light condition, Session 1, Session 3, and Session 5 were bright light (1000 lux) exposure sessions, and Session 2, Session 4, and Session 6 were dim light (<5 lux) exposure sessions. In the continuous light condition, all of the six sessions were bright light (1000 lux) exposure sessions. In the dim light condition, all of the six light exposure sessions were dim light (<5 lux) exposure sessions.BS: baseline; A: assessment (PVT + KSS); A1~A12: assessment 1~assessment 12 (PVT + KSS).
Figure 3Subjective alertness over time course under different lighting conditions. CL: continuous light condition; IL: intermittent light condition; DL: dim light condition; Values: KSS raw data; Error bars: standard error; BS: baseline; A1~A12: assessment 1~assessment 12. * p < 0.05.
Figure 4Reaction time in objective alertness over time course under different lighting conditions. CL: continuous light condition; IL: intermittent light condition; DL: dim light condition; DL: dim light condition; Values: median RT; Error bars: standard error; BS: baseline; A1~A12: assessment 1~assessment 12. * p < 0.05.
Figure 5The lapse of Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) over time course under different lighting conditions. CL: continuous light condition; IL: intermittent light condition; DL: dim light condition; Values: the percent of lapse number; Error bars: standard error; BS: baseline; A1~A12: assessment 1~assessment 12. * p < 0.05.
Sleep parameters subsequent to the three lighting exposure conditions.
| Stages | IL | CL | DL | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TIB (min) | 393.9 ± 17.0 | 392.3 ± 16.2 | 404.1 ± 13.8 | 0.619 | 0.546 | 0.042 |
| TST (min) | 363 ± 15.9 | 368.4 ± 15.0 | 387.5 ± 13.3 | 4.473 | 0.045 | 0.199 |
| SOL (min) | 13.1 ± 3.7 | 9.6 ± 1.8 | 4.4 ± 0.7 | 3.782 | 0.063 | 0.213 |
| RL (min) | 69.1 ± 7.1 | 81.4 ± 7.6 | 66.7 ± 3.2 | 2.332 | 0.116 | 0.143 |
| SE (%) | 92.3 ± 1.4 | 94.0 ± 0.8 | 95.9 ± 0.4 | 3.894 | 0.049 | 0.218 |
| N1 (%) | 4.2 ± 0.5 | 4.4 ± 0.9 | 4.1 ± 0.6 | 0.131 | 0.878 | 0.009 |
| N2 (%) | 55.6 ± 1.5 | 56.3 ± 1.3 | 54.9 ± 1.8 | 0.583 | 0.565 | 0.040 |
| N3 (%) | 16.0 ± 1.6 | 16.7 ± 1.7 | 16.6 ± 1.2 | 0.156 | 0.865 | 0.011 |
| REM (%) | 24.1 ± 1.3 | 22.6 ± 1.2 | 24.5 ± 1.2 | 1.099 | 0.347 | 0.073 |
| WASO (%) | 5.2 ± 1.1 | 2.7 ± 0.5 | 2.8 ± 0.4 | 4.800 | 0.077 | 0.286 |
CL: continuous light condition; IL: intermittent light condition; DL: dim light condition; TIB, time in bed; TST, total sleep time; SOL, sleep latency to sleep onset; RL, REM sleep latency (after sleep onset); SE, sleep efficiency (TST/TIB × 100); N1, NREM sleep stage 1; N2, NREM sleep stage 2; N3, NREM sleep stage 3; REM, REM sleep; WASO (%), the time of wakefulness after sleep onset in the TST. Values are depicted as mean ± 1 standard error of the mean (N = 15).