Pallesen Ståle, Nordhus Inger Hilde, Skelton Stine Hjelle, Bjorvatn Bjørn, Skjerve Arvid
Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen Norwegian Competence Center for Sleep Disorders.
Percept Mot Skills. 2005 Dec;101(3):759-70. doi: 10.2466/pms.101.3.759-770.
31 subjects, age 55 yr. or older, suffering from mild early morning awakening were randomized to either a bright light (10,000 lux) or to a red dim light placebo condition (200 lux). Light exposure took place in the evening in the patients' homes, 60 to 30 min. before bedtime and lasted for 3 wk. The subjects kept a sleep diary for 2 wk. and wore an actigraph for 1 wk. both before treatment and at post-treatment. Of the eight sleep diary outcome variables, significant effects that could be attributed to the light treatment were only detected for time spent in bed after final morning awakening. None of the six actigraph outcome variables yielded any significant effect of the light therapy. Explanations for the limited therapeutic effects of bright light treatment obtained in the present study are discussed, such as the criteria defining early morning awakening, the selection procedure, problems with compliance, age of the sample, and the dose of light. The lack of an objective circadian marker in this study could represent a problem concerning the timing of the light exposure. Despite the limited success of bright light therapy in this study, bright light therapy should still be considered as a treatment option for early morning awakening.
31名年龄在55岁及以上、患有轻度早醒问题的受试者被随机分为两组,一组接受强光(10000勒克斯)照射,另一组接受红色暗光安慰剂照射(200勒克斯)。光照在晚上进行,在患者家中,睡前60至30分钟,持续3周。受试者在治疗前和治疗后分别记录2周的睡眠日记,并佩戴活动记录仪1周。在八项睡眠日记结果变量中,仅在最终早晨醒来后在床上花费的时间这一变量上检测到可归因于光照治疗的显著效果。六项活动记录仪结果变量中均未产生光照疗法的任何显著效果。本文讨论了本研究中强光治疗效果有限的原因,如定义早醒的标准、选择程序、依从性问题、样本年龄和光照剂量等。本研究中缺乏客观的昼夜节律标志物可能是光照时间安排方面的一个问题。尽管本研究中强光疗法的成功率有限,但强光疗法仍应被视为早醒的一种治疗选择。