| Literature DB >> 35937880 |
Nathalya Chrispim Lima1, Roumen Kirov2, Katie Moraes de Almondes3.
Abstract
Objective: Cognitive impairment due to sleep deprivation (SD) is an important global health concern as part of the growing rates of sleep disorders and sleep deprivation worldwide. Amongst the affected cognitive processes, the effects of SD on the executive functions (EFs) show diverse methods and inconclusive or contradictory results, highlighting the importance of further research in this field. Considering this scenario, we evaluate one of the most used methods for objectively evaluating EFs on SD: the event-related potential (ERP) P300.Entities:
Keywords: Event-Related Potentials (ERP); Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS); P300; cognition; executive function; sleep; sleep deprivation; working memory
Year: 2022 PMID: 35937880 PMCID: PMC9355472 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2022.906492
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 5.152
Figure 1Flow chart of the search and selection stages of the review.
Details of selected articles, according to following categories: authors and country of origin, objectives of the study, participants, study design, use of P300, and conclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Ak et al. ( | • Evaluate the relationship between quality of sleep and cognitive function of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS) patients before and after treatment. | • 30 adult and | • Patients and controls filled the Epworth Sleepiness Scale and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Scale before performing the neurocognitive tests. | • Stroop test utilized to assess reaction time, attention and inhibitory control | • P300 was assessed through an auditory oddball paradigm performed after Stroop. | • OSAS patients before CPAP showed decreased P300 amplitude and increased latency when compared to control subjects ( | • OSAS patients showed: |
| Barnes et al. ( | • Identify electrophysiological signs that correlate with neurocognitive alterations in children with OSAS. | • 14 children with OSAS (9 females, age 6.21 ± 1.81 years). | • All children filled in behavioral and screening tests before undergoing polysomnography. | • Prior IQ screening performed using Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT-III) as part of exclusion criteria. | • Following NEPSY, an auditory oddball task was performed to elicit ERPs. | • The experimental group showed a reverse activation pattern for P300 latency in more complex tasks, with activation in different brain regions (amygdala or temporal lobe, contrasting precuneus for controls) and a lower amplitude compared to the control group. | • Children with OSAS performed worse on neurocognitive tasks compared to the control group. |
| El-Gharib and Sharsher ( | • Investigate the influence of the CPAP machine on short term memory of patients with OSAS. | • Control Group (20 total, 10 females, mean age 47.39 ± 2.04 years, all healthy). | • Study Group completed a full clinical evaluation and an inventory about OSAS symptoms before and after 3 months of regular CPAP use. | • P300 is the single correlate to working memory and selective attention, with no further neurocognitive testing or protocol utilized. | • Both groups performed an auditory oddball task while recording ERPs. | • Study Group showed longer latency (296.16 ± 30.08 ms for CG and 326.62 ± 28.51 ms for SG before CPAP) and smaller P300 amplitude (7.75 ± 0.811 μV for CG and 5.32 ± 2.18 μV for SG before CPAP, p < 0.000) compared to Control Group. | • P300 parameters and OSAS severity decreased after 3 months of intervention but remained below healthy population average. |
| Gelir et al. ( | • Investigate the effects of OSAS on cognitive functions such as attention, learning and memory. | • 15 on OSAS Group (mean age: 41.5 ± 2.5) | • All participants underwent polysomnography 2 weeks prior to cognitive evaluation. | • Test battery including three visuospatial N-back tasks, a mirror-drawing task and the Trail Making Test. | • P300 used as an electrophysiological correlate for selective attention and EFs. | • P300 components lower in the OSAS group compared to the Control Group (S.E. of the difference = 1.2, t = 2.2, | • Impairment in attention and executive function on OSAS subjects per P300 results. |
| Vakulin et al. ( | • Identify clinical or neurobehavioral measures capable of predicting abnormal driving associated with OSAS. | • 38 OSAS patients of differing disorder severity (10 females, age 52.0 ± 1.7 years) | • All participants underwent polysomnography to assess baseline levels 1 week prior. | • Stroop was utilized to measure inhibitory control and selective attention. Trail-making was utilized to assess cognitive flexibility. Symbol Digit Substitution Test (SDST) was utilized to evaluate working memory and psychomotor vigilance. | • ERPs were assessed through an auditory oddball task. | • Significant difference found between OSAS and control group for in P300 latency, with OSAS subjects showing prolonged latency (328.8 ± 5.8 for Controls vs. 348.8 ± 6.2 for OSAS groups). | • OSAS patients, both vulnerable and resilient to abnormal driving, showed lower average scores than controls on all performed EFs tasks, though the difference between groups was not significant. |
| Whittemore and Knafl ( | • Investigate the pattern of neurocognitive disfunction in OSAS. | • 50 subjects from the Brain Resource International Database (BRID), predicted to have OSAS based on the Multivariable Apnea Prediction Index (MAPI) (15 female, age: 51.59 ± 13.42 years). | • Participants were classified as OSAS group or control group according to their scores on the MAPI questionnaire. | • Following | • ERPs were recorded through standard auditory oddball paradigm. | • OSAS group showed reduced P3b amplitude compared to the control group (OSAS group: 5.68 ± 0.44 vs. Controls: 7.53 ± 0.23, p < 0.0003). | • An algorithm based on demographic factors and standard OSAS symptoms was successful in selecting a group of individuals manifesting OSAS-related deficits both in information processing and in all three EFs. |
| Yerlikaya et al. ( | • Investigate cognitive impairment in severe OSAS patients through objective and indirect measures | • 54 severe OSAS patients (age: 38.94 ± 7.43, 3 female). | • Prior to experiment, all OSAS patients and 16 healthy controls underwent polysomnography either for classification of OSAS severity or to ensure its absence. | • Mini Mental State Examination | • A visual oddball task was used to elicit P300. | • Both low and high hypoxemia OSAS groups showed lower P300 amplitudes compared to controls [ | • Suggests that electrophysiological measures could be better indicators of cognitive impairment than neurocognitive tests for OSAS patients. |
|
| |||||||
| Belcher et al. ( | • Determine whether neurophysiological or occupational impairments within Shift Work Disorder were related to insomnia or excessive sleepiness as SWD symptoms. | • 34 night workers (mean age: 35.41 ± 9.35 years, 62.2% female) that had exclusively worked on night shifts for the past 6 months. | • Individuals underwent an overnight protocol composed of a multiple sleep latency test and an auditory oddball task. | • The EWPS | • A standard auditory oddball task was utilized for ERPs detection. | • Alert Insomniacs showed significantly lower responses on both P3a (mean difference: 1.66–1.77, | • Insomnia as a symptom was correlated with functional and cognitive impairments relating to general executive functioning, especially in relation to selective attention lapses, in subjects with Shift Work Disorder. |
| Cha et al. ( | • Investigate cortical mechanisms that may be involved in cognitive deficits on patients with Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS). | • 17 female patients with RLS (Age: 53.7 ± 9.6 years), not under medication | • Prior clinical interview and sleep questionnaire application | • P300 was assessed as a correlate of general executive function. | • P300 was assessed through a visual oddball task. | • P300 found to have a delayed latency [RLS > controls, | • Cognitive impairment found in RLS patients, especially of working memory, could be related to abnormal activation of the frontal region. |
| Choudhary et al. ( | • Investigate attention and reaction time (visual and auditory) in night watchmen under a sleep restriction protocol. | • 50 watchmen (age: 18–35 years), divided into two groups: | • Group II participants were sleep restricted to <3 h of sleep on a night shift in the week of the experiments. | • Solely P300 was used as a correlate of selective attention performance, with an additional electric setup to record reaction times. | • P300 was assessed through an auditory oddball task. | • After the 4th and 7th day of sleep restriction, Group II participants showed prolonged P300 latency (from 300 to 400 ms to 600 ms) and P300 reduced amplitude (From slightly under 15 μV, to under 10 μV, to 5 μV) compared to Group I. | • Loss of sleep has a major impact on attention and reaction time among night shift participants, compared to daytime workers. |
| Jung et al. ( | • Identify electrophysiologic relations to cognitive dysfunction in unmedicated Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) patients. | • 17 drug-naïve all female RLS patients (53.7 ± 9.6 years). | • RLS patients filled in the International RLS Severity Scale (IRSL) | • Solely P300 was assessed as an electrophysiological correlate to attention, cognitive flexibility and information processing. | • EEG was recorded during the waking–resting state, through a visual oddball task. | • P300 latency significantly increased, and P300 amplitude significantly decreased, in the RLS group compared to controls [ | • RLS patients show underlying cognitive impairment related to increased attention deficits and cortical/executive dysfunction when compared to control subjects. |
| Jung et al. ( | • Evaluate the effects of pramipexole on working memory performance of RLS patients using ERP. | • 13 drug-naive RLS patients (52.0 ± 9.48 years, 12 female). | • Prior sleep questionnaire protocol: Global Sleep Assessment Questionnaire (GSAQ), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality (PSQI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Beck Depression Inventory II and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). | • Protocol included a visual Sternberg Item Recognition paradigm | • ERPs provoked through the Sternberg paradigm. | • P300 amplitude significantly increased in the parietal area after treatment with pramipexole for all memory load (ML) sizes of the Sternberg paradigm (ML size 2, t = 3.153, | • Concludes that a daily pramipexole protocol results in improvement of working memory performance, RLS symptoms, sleep alterations and depressive symptoms in RLS patients. |
| Kim et al. ( | • Investigate working memory deficits in patients with Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) | • 13 unmedicated RLS patients (11 females, age 37.5–58.0 years). | • Prior polysomnography, interview and sleep questionnaire protocol to assess for inclusion and exclusion criteria. | • After polysomnography, both groups completed a digit-based Sternberg working memory task. | • The Sternberg task was used to elicit P300, and both were utilized as correlates for working memory. | • Significant results found in regard to brain regions (frontal, central, and parietal) and memory load (two, three, and four) as within-subject factors (F = 25.596, | • Findings suggest that patients with severe RLS have working memory impairment. |
| Quan et al. ( | • Investigate the impact of Sleep Disordered Breathing (SDB) on neurocognitive functions of children 5 years after discovery of the condition. | • Experimental group: 43 children who had shown SBD at their initial exam (age: 6–11 years). | • Participants were part of a cohort from a previous study, and had previously undergone a night of unsupervised, at-home polysomnography and filled a questionnaire regarding their sleep habits. | • Sustained Working Memory Task (SWMT), designed for ERP recording. | • P300 was used in this context as a correlate for working memory. | • Despite no significant differences in neurocognitive test performance, SDB children showed reduced P300 amplitude compared to Control group during reaction time and working memory subitems ( | • Findings suggest that SBD in children may result in long-term changes in working memory that are only detectable through objective means, and not through neurocognitive testing. |
| Yaman et al. ( | • Investigate the effects of modafinil on auditory P300 components on patients with idiopathic hypersomnia (IH). | • 18 patients (age range: 16–48 years) with a diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia (IH). | • Participants were selected amongst diagnosed IH patients from the researcher's university clinics, and thus had already gone through prior evaluation. | • P300 was utilized as the sole electrophysiological correlate to general executive functioning. | • An auditory oddball task to elicit P300 was performed by all patients before and after treatment. | • After modafinil treatment, average P300 latencies were significantly lower than latencies before the treatment on all electrode recording sites (BT: 334.9 ± 14.8 AT: 312.0 ± 26.0, p < 0.004). | • One week of modafinil 200 mg/day treatment improved general EFs performance, as well as general cognitive performance, and alertness of IH patients. |
| Zhao et al. ( | • Investigate whether Insomnia Disorder (ID) patients show inhibitory control deficits, and to assess correlated neural mechanisms. | • 12 individuals with ID (8 females, age 49.1 ± 7.6 years). | • Prior polysomnography, followed by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Self- | • The morning after polysomnography, all participants performed an auditory stop-signal paradigm while recording for ERPs. | • P300 elicited through an auditory stop-sign task. | • ID patients show reduced P300 amplitude, compared to controls, during successful stop trials [ | • Findings suggest that individuals with ID show impairment to inhibitory control. |
|
| |||||||
| Cote et al. ( | • Investigate brain physiology associated with sleep deprivation caused by auditory-induced sleep fragmentation. | • 8 healthy adults (4 female, mean age = 33.25 ± 6.50 years) with no sleep complaints. | • Participants spent 4 days (24 h periods) in the laboratory, with sleep fragmentation induced by auditory stimuli on nights 2 and 3. | • Between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., participants would complete a computerized test battery at every 2 h. | • The auditory discrimination task followed a traditional oddball paradigm to elicit P300. | • P300 was recorded alongside N1 to assess possible effects of SD on attention. P300 results were consistent throughout the entire experiment, with no indication of impairment, which the authors attribute to possible compensatory mechanisms. | • ERP data from N1 suggests impairment of information processing, attention and alertness related to reduced arousal caused by sleep fragmentation but showed no correlation to attentional or executive impairment. P300 results indicated no impairment to EFs. |
| Ko et al. ( | • Investigate the effects of sleep fragmentation on error monitoring processes. | • 13 adults (age: 20–35, gender ratio undisclosed) without any previous sleep complaints. | • Prior polysomnography and sleep questionnaire protocol composed of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Owl and Lark Questionnaire from Horne & Ostberg, Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). | • Cognitive battery composed of the CPT (sustained attention and general higher executive control), PASAT (sustained attention and information processing) and a modified flanker task (measures inhibitory control) while recording ERPs. | • The modified flanker test was used to elicit P300, which was used as correlate to attention and inhibitory control alongside the flanker task. | • P300 amplitude was reduced in the high sleep fragmentation condition [SF main effect: | • Attention and error monitoring were impaired following one night of sleep fragmentation, regardless of total sleep hours. |
| Kusztor et al. ( | • Investigate the effects of total sleep deprivation on attention and cognitive control. | • 24 healthy participants (12 females; age: 24 ± 3 years) | • Prior to testing, volunteers filled the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Inventory (PSQI). | • Participants performed a visual, computerized Stop Signal task while recording ERPs. No other assessment of executive functions was used. | • P300 was assessed through the visual Stop Sign task as a correlate to selective attention and inhibitory control. | • P300 amplitude relating to the “stop” stage of the Stop Signal task was lower after the total SD night compared to the two control nights at home and at the laboratory [ | • Higher cognitive processes, such as sustained attention, are more affected by sleep deprivation than automatic processes. |
| Lee et al. ( | • Investigate cognitive impairments associated with total sleep deprivation. | • 30 healthy college students (8 females, mean age: 24.47 ± 1.33 years) without sleep complaints. | • Prior to experiment, volunteers kept a sleep diary for 2 weeks to exclude those with any prior sleep deprivation or alteration. Participants were | • Volunteers | • After the neurocognitive test battery, volunteers recorded P300 through an auditory oddball test. | • P300 latency was significantly longer ( | • P300 alterations during total sleep deprivation can be correlated to a decrease in vigilance and a longer reaction time, but higher functions such as working memory may not be affected. |
| Liu et al. ( | • Study the effects of stressful situations such as sleep deprivation and social deprivation on physiological and psychological responses of healthy subjects. | • 12 healthy male adults (age: 18–30 years) | • Participants were sorted into 72 h of social isolation or 72 h of total sleep deprivation experimental conditions. | • ERPs and physiological processes were recorded while performing a numeric Go/No Go task. | • P300 was used as a correlate to inhibitory control. | • Sleep deprived participants had a lower P300 amplitude than their own pre-test conditions [ | • Total SD influences information processing speed, mood and vagal tone of affected individuals, resulting in impact on inhibitory control. |
| Macdonald et al. ( | • Ealuate how infrequent changes on the intensity of auditory stimuli can affect executive functioning during sleep. | • 9 healthy, self-reported good sleepers (4 females, 21.4 ± 3.0 years). | • Subjects slept at the laboratory under EEG monitoring for one night. EEG recording and initial auditory stimuli were first delivered during relaxed wakefulness while participants read a book, for control conditions. | • P300 was utilized as correlate to general executive functioning, with the specifications by the authors mainly characterizing inhibitory control. | • P300 was utilized as correlate to general executive functioning. | • Increment of auditory stimuli during the night corresponded to a peak of central P3a, with reduced amplitude when compared to the P3a registeredduring relaxed wakefulness. | • Increased intensity of an acoustic stimulus during Rapid Eye Movement will elicit a P3a, presumed to correspond to the interruption of executive functioning resulting in potential awareness of stimulus input. |
| Molfese et al. ( | • Study the impact of sleep restriction on the neurocognitive skills of children, through brain imagining techniques. | • 6 male children (mean age: 7.66 years, all within the 6.6–8.3 years range), with normal sleep patterns. | • Prior polysomnography. | • Prior neuropsychological testing to assess their baseline levels within age average. | • Prior baseline ERPs responses recorded and compared to results post-sleep restriction. | • P300 amplitude significantly reduced following restricted sleep compared to baseline [ | • Minor sleep restriction significantly impacts children's working memory and inhibitory control, with a slower reaction on both compared to pre-experimental performance. |
| Qi et al. ( | • Investigate executive functions under total sleep deprivation. | • 24 participants, all male (age: 19 ± 1.6 years) divided into two groups: Total Sleep Deprivation (TSD) group and Control group. | • Prior assessment of sleep habits two weeks before experiment through a sleep diary and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Inventory (PSQI). | • Both groups performed a visual Go/No Go task before the TSD group was submitted to SD protocol. | • P300 was elicited through the Go/No Go task, and utilized as a correlate for inhibitory control, working memory and cognitive flexibility. | • The TSD group showed reduced amplitude [ | • Significant impairment of the executive functions after total sleep deprivation, most of all working memory (for stimulus recognition) and inhibitory control (for reaction inhibition). |
| Ray et al. ( | • Test the efficacy of modafinil as a countermeasure to cognitive impairment in sleep deprived individuals. | • 11 healthy males, age 25–30 years, with no history of sleep alterations or modafinil use. | • Participants were assessed through the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS) and Epworth Sleepiness scale (ESS) throughout all five applications. | • The sole method for evaluating executive functions was through ERPs. | • ERPs components were assessed through auditory oddball paradigm. | • Significant increase in P300 latency after SD, when compared to baseline [ | • Results suggest that modafinil in a dose of 400 mg/day significantly reduces attention lapses and cognitive impairment, such as working memory loss, and subjective sleepiness after SD. |
| Renn and Cote, | • Evaluate the effects of total sleep deprivation on performance monitoring and inhibitory control processes. | • Total sleep deprivation group (12 females, mean age: men = 19.23 ± 1.48; women = 19.25 ± 1.29) | • Prior polysomnography to assess existing SD. | • Morning after the second experimental night, all participants were administered the Performance Assessment Batteries (PABs). | • P300 was primarily utilized as correlate to inhibitory control and working memory. | • Sleep deprived participants showed smaller P300 amplitude compared to control group, but no significant changes in latency [ | • The results support the hypothesis on the impairment of performance monitoring processes, such as inhibitory control and working memory, on sleep deprived individuals. |
| Schapkin et al. ( | • Investigate the effects of nocturnal traffic noise on inhibitory control and cognitive performance. | • 20 healthy subjects, with no prior history of sleep complaints (11 female, age:18–30 years) | • Participants were evaluated for four nights for 3 weeks: a quiet night for baseline performance, followed three nights with aircraft noise presented at 39, 44, and 50 dBA, respectively, between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. | • Following SF nights, volunteers performed two visual Go/No Go tasks, one considered “easy,” and another considered “difficult,” both with simultaneous ERP recording. | • P300 was primarily analyzed as correlate to inhibitory control. | • P3 latency was longer and amplitude was smaller in the difficult task, compared to the results of the easy task. | • Nocturnal traffic noise impacts inhibitory control during the day, even if there is no noticeable loss of functioning. |
| Schapkin et al. ( | • Determine the effects of noise-induced sleep disturbance on executive functions of healthy subjects, using motivational traits (“hope of success” and “fear of failure”) as mediating variables. | • 32 healthy participants total (16 female; 23 ± 3 years of age). All assessed to not have prior hearing or sight issues, nor sleep alterations. | • Subjects spent four nights of three different weeks at the laboratory: one quiet control night and three nights with railway noise at different noise levels per week. | • After each night, subjects performed a task battery that included a switch task (for cognitive flexibility), a randomizing task (for working memory), an easy and difficult visual Go/No-Go task (for inhibitory control), both with simultaneous EEG recording. | • P300 was primarily assessed as a correlate to inhibitory control in this study design. | • P300 amplitude is significantly reduced during Noise conditions for all subjects [ | • Results suggest that motivation variables can modulate executive control and stimulus-response, as well as increase resistance to the negative effects of noise-induced sleep disturbance. |
| Zhang et al. ( | • Investigate the possible side-effects of a zaleplon-induced nap on inhibitory control following 30 h of sleep deprivation (SD). | • 16 adult participants, all male (age: 21.8 average). | • Participants were assessed as intermediary through the Owl and Lark questionnaire prior to the experiment. | • Volunteers performed a visual Go/No Go task at five different moments throughout the experimental period: (1) At baseline; (2) after 30 h of SD; (3) after awakening from zaleplon-induced nap; (4) 4 h post-drug; and (5) 6 h post-drug. | • P300 was assessed in this design as a correlate to inhibitory control to analyze the effect of zaleplon on Go/No-Go performance. | • After 30 h of SD followed by a nap, there is significant increase in P300 latency and decrease in P300 amplitude related to the No Go step (Fz [ | • These results indicate that zaleplon at a dose of 10 mg/day may help subjects maintain or recover impulse inhibition, though the side effects of zaleplon last at least 2 h post-drug. |