Pachito Daniela V, Eckeli Alan L, Desouky Ahmed S, Corbett Mark A, Partonen Timo, Rajaratnam Shantha Mw, Riera Rachel
Cochrane Brazil, Centro de Estudos de Saúde Baseada em Evidências e Avaliação Tecnológica em Saúde, Rua Borges Lagoa, 564 cj 63, São Paulo, SP, Brazil, 04038-000.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Mar 2;3(3):CD012243. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012243.pub2.
Exposure to light plays a crucial role in biological processes, influencing mood and alertness. Daytime workers may be exposed to insufficient or inappropriate light during daytime, leading to mood disturbances and decreases in levels of alertness.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of lighting interventions to improve alertness and mood in daytime workers.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, seven other databases; ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization trials portal up to January 2018.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and non-randomised controlled before-after trials (CBAs) that employed a cross-over or parallel-group design, focusing on any type of lighting interventions applied for daytime workers.
Two review authors independently screened references in two stages, extracted outcome data and assessed risk of bias. We used standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to pool data from different questionnaires and scales assessing the same outcome across different studies. We combined clinically homogeneous studies in a meta-analysis. We used the GRADE system to rate quality of evidence.
The search yielded 2844 references. After screening titles and abstracts, we considered 34 full text articles for inclusion. We scrutinised reports against the eligibility criteria, resulting in the inclusion of five studies (three RCTs and two CBAs) with 282 participants altogether. These studies evaluated four types of comparisons: cool-white light, technically known as high correlated colour temperature (CCT) light versus standard illumination; different proportions of indirect and direct light; individually applied blue-enriched light versus no treatment; and individually applied morning bright light versus afternoon bright light for subsyndromal seasonal affective disorder.We found no studies comparing one level of illuminance versus another.We found two CBA studies (163 participants) comparing high CCT light with standard illumination. By pooling their results via meta-analysis we found that high CCT light may improve alertness (SMD -0.69, 95% CI -1.28 to -0.10; Columbia Jet Lag Scale and the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale) when compared to standard illumination. In one of the two CBA studies with 94 participants there was no difference in positive mood (mean difference (MD) 2.08, 95% CI -0.1 to 4.26) or negative mood (MD -0.45, 95% CI -1.84 to 0.94) assessed using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) scale. High CCT light may have fewer adverse events than standard lighting (one CBA; 94 participants). Both studies were sponsored by the industry. We graded the quality of evidence as very low.We found no studies comparing light of a particular illuminance and light spectrum or CCT versus another combination of illuminance and light spectrum or CCT.We found no studies comparing daylight versus artificial light.We found one RCT (64 participants) comparing the effects of different proportions of direct and indirect light: 100% direct lighting, 70% direct lighting plus 30% indirect lighting, 30% direct lighting plus 70% indirect lighting and 100% indirect lighting. There was no substantial difference in mood, as assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory, or in adverse events, such as ocular, reading or concentration problems, in the short or medium term. We graded the quality of evidence as low.We found two RCTs comparing individually administered light versus no treatment. According to one RCT with 25 participants, blue-enriched light individually applied for 30 minutes a day may enhance alertness (MD -3.30, 95% CI -6.28 to -0.32; Epworth Sleepiness Scale) and may improve mood (MD -4.8, 95% CI -9.46 to -0.14; Beck Depression Inventory). We graded the quality of evidence as very low. One RCT with 30 participants compared individually applied morning bright light versus afternoon bright light for subsyndromal seasonal affective disorder. There was no substantial difference in alertness levels (MD 7.00, 95% CI -10.18 to 24.18), seasonal affective disorder symptoms (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.81, 3.20; number of participants presenting with a decrease of at least 50% in SIGH-SAD scores) or frequency of adverse events (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.07). Among all participants, 57% had a reduction of at least 50% in their SIGH-SAD score. We graded the quality of evidence as low.Publication bias could not be assessed for any of these comparisons.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very low-quality evidence based on two CBA studies that high CCT light may improve alertness, but not mood, in daytime workers. There is very low-quality evidence based on one CBA study that high CCT light may also cause less irritability, eye discomfort and headache than standard illumination. There is low-quality evidence based on one RCT that different proportions of direct and indirect light in the workplace do not affect alertness or mood. There is very low-quality evidence based on one RCT that individually applied blue-enriched light improves both alertness and mood. There is low-quality evidence based on one RCT that individually administered bright light during the afternoon is as effective as morning exposure for improving alertness and mood in subsyndromal seasonal affective disorder.
光照在生物过程中起着至关重要的作用,会影响情绪和警觉性。白天工作的人在白天可能会暴露于不足或不适当的光照下,从而导致情绪紊乱和警觉性下降。
评估照明干预措施对提高白天工作者的警觉性和改善情绪的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、Embase以及其他七个数据库;截至2018年1月的ClinicalTrials.gov和世界卫生组织试验注册平台。
我们纳入了采用交叉或平行组设计的随机对照试验(RCT)和非随机对照前后试验(CBA),重点关注应用于白天工作者的任何类型的照明干预措施。
两位综述作者分两个阶段独立筛选参考文献,提取结局数据并评估偏倚风险。我们使用标准化均数差(SMD)和95%置信区间(CI)汇总来自不同问卷和量表的数据,这些问卷和量表评估了不同研究中的相同结局。我们在荟萃分析中合并了临床同质的研究。我们使用GRADE系统对证据质量进行评级。
检索共获得2844篇参考文献。在筛选标题和摘要后,我们考虑纳入34篇全文文章。我们根据纳入标准仔细审查了报告,最终纳入了五项研究(三项RCT和两项CBA),共282名参与者。这些研究评估了四种比较:冷白光,技术上称为高相关色温(CCT)光与标准照明;不同比例的间接光和直接光;单独应用的蓝光富集光与不治疗;以及单独应用的早晨强光与下午强光治疗亚综合征季节性情感障碍。我们未发现比较不同照度水平的研究。我们发现两项CBA研究(163名参与者)比较了高CCT光与标准照明。通过荟萃分析汇总其结果,我们发现与标准照明相比,高CCT光可能会提高警觉性(SMD -0.69,95% CI -1.28至-0.10;哥伦比亚时差量表和卡罗林斯卡嗜睡量表)。在两项有94名参与者的CBA研究中的一项中,使用正负情感量表(PANAS)评估时,积极情绪(均数差(MD)2.08,95% CI -0.1至4.26)或消极情绪(MD -0.45,95% CI -1.84至0.