Division of Sleep and Chronobiology, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Sleep. 2011 May 1;34(5):581-91. doi: 10.1093/sleep/34.5.581.
The psychomotor vigilance test (PVT) is among the most widely used measures of behavioral alertness, but there is large variation among published studies in PVT performance outcomes and test durations. To promote standardization of the PVT and increase its sensitivity and specificity to sleep loss, we determined PVT metrics and task durations that optimally discriminated sleep deprived subjects from alert subjects.
Repeated-measures experiments involving 10-min PVT assessments every 2 h across both acute total sleep deprivation (TSD) and 5 days of chronic partial sleep deprivation (PSD).
Controlled laboratory environment.
74 healthy subjects (34 female), aged 22-45 years.
TSD experiment involving 33 h awake (N = 31 subjects) and a PSD experiment involving 5 nights of 4 h time in bed (N = 43 subjects).
In a paired t-test paradigm and for both TSD and PSD, effect sizes of 10 different PVT performance outcomes were calculated. Effect sizes were high for both TSD (1.59-1.94) and PSD (0.88-1.21) for PVT metrics related to lapses and to measures of psychomotor speed, i.e., mean 1/RT (response time) and mean slowest 10% 1/RT. In contrast, PVT mean and median RT outcomes scored low to moderate effect sizes influenced by extreme values. Analyses facilitating only portions of the full 10-min PVT indicated that for some outcomes, high effect sizes could be achieved with PVT durations considerably shorter than 10 min, although metrics involving lapses seemed to profit from longer test durations in TSD.
Due to their superior conceptual and statistical properties and high sensitivity to sleep deprivation, metrics involving response speed and lapses should be considered primary outcomes for the 10-min PVT. In contrast, PVT mean and median metrics, which are among the most widely used outcomes, should be avoided as primary measures of alertness. Our analyses also suggest that some shorter-duration PVT versions may be sensitive to sleep loss, depending on the outcome variable selected, although this will need to be confirmed in comparative analyses of separate duration versions of the PVT. Using both sensitive PVT metrics and optimal test durations maximizes the sensitivity of the PVT to sleep loss and therefore potentially decreases the sample size needed to detect the same neurobehavioral deficit. We propose criteria to better standardize the 10-min PVT and facilitate between-study comparisons and meta-analyses.
精神运动警觉测试(PVT)是行为警觉性最广泛使用的测量方法之一,但在发表的研究中,PVT 表现结果和测试持续时间存在很大差异。为了促进 PVT 的标准化,并提高其对睡眠剥夺的敏感性和特异性,我们确定了 PVT 指标和任务持续时间,以最佳地区分睡眠剥夺和警觉的受试者。
重复测量实验,涉及在急性完全睡眠剥夺(TSD)和 5 天慢性部分睡眠剥夺(PSD)期间,每 2 小时进行 10 分钟的 PVT 评估。
受控实验室环境。
74 名健康受试者(34 名女性),年龄 22-45 岁。
TSD 实验涉及 33 小时清醒(N=31 名受试者)和 PSD 实验涉及 5 晚 4 小时卧床时间(N=43 名受试者)。
在配对 t 检验范式中,对于 TSD 和 PSD,计算了 10 种不同 PVT 性能结果的效应大小。TSD(1.59-1.94)和 PSD(0.88-1.21)的 PVT 指标与失误和运动速度的测量相关,即平均 1/RT(反应时间)和平均最慢 10%1/RT,其效应大小较高。相比之下,PVT 平均值和中位数 RT 结果的效应大小为低到中等,受到极值的影响。仅分析完整 10 分钟 PVT 的部分内容的分析表明,对于某些结果,与 10 分钟相比,较短的 PVT 持续时间可以获得较高的效应大小,尽管在 TSD 中,涉及失误的指标似乎从较长的测试持续时间中获益。
由于其优越的概念和统计特性以及对睡眠剥夺的高度敏感性,涉及反应速度和失误的指标应被视为 10 分钟 PVT 的主要结果。相比之下,PVT 平均值和中位数指标是最广泛使用的指标之一,应避免作为警觉性的主要衡量指标。我们的分析还表明,某些较短持续时间的 PVT 版本可能对睡眠剥夺敏感,具体取决于所选的结果变量,但这需要在对 PVT 的单独持续时间版本进行比较分析中得到证实。使用敏感的 PVT 指标和最佳测试持续时间可以最大限度地提高 PVT 对睡眠剥夺的敏感性,从而潜在地减少检测相同神经行为缺陷所需的样本量。我们提出了一些标准,以更好地标准化 10 分钟 PVT,并促进研究之间的比较和荟萃分析。