Suppr超能文献

远程和超远程商业航线飞行中的飞行员飞行中睡眠

Pilot In-Flight Sleep During Long-Range and Ultra-Long Range Commercial Airline Flights.

出版信息

Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2022 Apr 1;93(4):368-375. doi: 10.3357/AMHP.6023.2022.

Abstract

In commercial aviation, pilot fatigue is a major threat to safety. One key fatigue mitigation strategy on long-range (LR; 8-16 h) and ultra-long range (ULR; 16+ h on at least 10% of trips) routes is allotting in-flight rest breaks for the pilots. Since sleep is a strong predictor of performance, it is important to quantify total in-flight sleep (TIFS) and determine rest scheme schedules that optimize sleep opportunity and subsequent performance. Here we quantify in-flight sleep and characterize rest schemes by type and efficiency. Between 2015 and 2019, we collected data on in-flight sleep on 3 LR and 5 ULR routes totaling 231 pilots flying over 1200 flight duty periods. Data were collected using a combination of actigraphy and logbooks. Over all combinations of flight direction, crew and LR vs. ULR, average TIFS ranged from 3.4 h to 5.2 h with some ULR pilots getting over 8 h. Most crews made use of simple two- or three-break rest schemes and the complex four-break rest schemes were used almost exclusively on the three longest ULR routes. The complex schemes were less efficient than simple schemes, although this effect was small. Complex schemes resulted in no more TIFS compared to simple schemes on the same routes. Overall, we find that crews are getting more sleep on these routes than previously reported on similar routes. Most crews use simple rest schemes and these simple schemes are more efficient than complex schemes.

摘要

在商业航空领域,飞行员疲劳是对安全的主要威胁。在长途(LR;8-16 小时)和超长程(ULR;至少 10%的航程超过 16 小时)航线上,一项关键的疲劳缓解策略是为飞行员分配飞行中休息时间。由于睡眠是表现的重要预测因素,因此量化总飞行睡眠时间(TIFS)并确定优化睡眠机会和随后表现的休息方案时间表非常重要。在这里,我们通过类型和效率来量化飞行中睡眠并描述休息方案。在 2015 年至 2019 年期间,我们收集了 3 条 LR 和 5 条 ULR 航线的飞行中睡眠数据,共有 231 名飞行员在 1200 多个飞行执勤期内飞行。数据是通过活动记录仪和飞行日志的组合收集的。在所有飞行方向、机组人员和 LR 与 ULR 的组合中,平均 TIFS 范围从 3.4 小时到 5.2 小时不等,一些 ULR 飞行员的睡眠时间超过 8 小时。大多数机组人员使用简单的两到三个休息方案,复杂的四个休息方案几乎只在三条最长的 ULR 航线上使用。复杂的方案效率低于简单的方案,尽管这种影响很小。在相同的航线上,复杂的方案与简单的方案相比并没有产生更多的 TIFS。总体而言,我们发现机组人员在这些航线上的睡眠时间比以前在类似航线上报告的睡眠时间要多。大多数机组人员使用简单的休息方案,而这些简单的方案比复杂的方案效率更高。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验