Subjective ratings of fatigue are increasingly being used as part of a suite of tools to assess fatigue-related risk on the road and in the workplace. There is some debate however, as to whether individuals can accurately gauge their own fatigue states, particularly under conditions of sleep restriction. It is also unclear which references are used by individuals to assess fatigue -- for example prior sleep, time of day, workload, or previous ratings. The current study used a sophisticated laboratory protocol to examine the independent contributions of sleep, circadian phase and sleep debt to fatigue ratings. Importantly, participants had no knowledge of time of day, how much sleep they were getting, or how long they were awake. Twenty-eight healthy, young males participated in one of two conditions of a 28áh forced desynchrony protocol -- severe sleep restriction (4.7áh sleep and 23.3áh wake) or moderate sleep restriction (7áh sleep and 21áh wake). Fatigue ratings were provided prior to and following each sleep period using the Samn-Perelli fatigue scale. Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to analyse the effects of circadian phase, sleep dose and study day. Results demonstrated an effect of circadian phase on both pre-sleep and post-sleep fatigue ratings. The significant effect of study day is interpreted as an effect of circadian time, as opposed to accumulating sleep debt. An effect of sleep dose was only seen in post-sleep fatigue ratings. The findings suggest that post-sleep fatigue ratings may be sensitive to prior sleep and may be useful as an indicator of fatigue-related risk, particularly when triangulated with information about recent total sleep time. (A) Reprinted with permission from Elsevier.
Samenvatting