Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Division of Sleep Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
J Pineal Res. 2022 Nov;73(4):e12826. doi: 10.1111/jpi.12826. Epub 2022 Sep 5.
Spaceflight exposes crewmembers to circadian misalignment and sleep loss, which impair cognition and increase the risk of errors and accidents. We compared the effects of an experimental dynamic lighting schedule (DLS) with a standard static lighting schedule (SLS) on circadian phase, self-reported sleep and cognition during a 45-day simulated space mission. Sixteen participants (mean age [±SD] 37.4 ± 6.7 years; 5 F; n = 8/lighting condition) were studied in four-person teams at the NASA Human Exploration Research Analog. Participants were scheduled to sleep 8 h/night on two weekend nights, 5 h/night on five weekday nights, repeated for six 7-day cycles, with scheduled waketime fixed at 7:00 a.m. Compared to the SLS where illuminance and spectrum remained constant during wake (4000K), DLS increased the illuminance and short-wavelength (blue) content of white light (6000K) approximately threefold in the main workspace (Level 1), until 3 h before bedtime when illuminance was reduced by 96% and the blue content also reduced throughout (4000K × 2 h, ~3000K × 1 h) until bedtime. The average (±SE) urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) acrophase time was significantly later in the SLS (6.22 ± 0.34 h) compared to the DLS (4.76 ± 0.53 h) and more variable in SLS compared to DLS (37.2 ± 3.6 min vs. 28.2 ± 2.4 min, respectively, p = .04). Compared to DLS, self-reported sleep was more frequently misaligned relative to circadian phase in SLS RR: 6.75, 95% CI 1.55-29.36, p = .01), but neither self-reported sleep duration nor latency to sleep was different between lighting conditions. Accuracy in the abstract matching and matrix reasoning tests were significantly better in DLS compared to SLS (false discovery rate-adjusted p ≤ .04). Overall, DLS alleviated the drift in circadian phase typically observed in space analog studies and reduced the prevalence of self-reported sleep episodes occurring at an adverse circadian phase. Our results support incorporating DLS in future missions, which may facilitate appropriate circadian alignment and reduce the risk of sleep disruption.
太空飞行使机组人员面临昼夜节律紊乱和睡眠不足的问题,这会损害认知能力并增加错误和事故的风险。我们比较了实验性动态照明时间表 (DLS) 和标准静态照明时间表 (SLS) 对 45 天模拟太空任务期间昼夜节律相位、自我报告的睡眠和认知的影响。在 NASA 人类探索研究模拟基地,16 名参与者(平均年龄 [±SD] 37.4 ± 6.7 岁;5 名女性;n = 8/照明条件)以四人一组进行研究。参与者被安排在两个周末晚上睡 8 小时/晚,五个工作日晚上睡 5 小时/晚,重复六个 7 天周期,预定清醒时间固定在早上 7:00。与 SLS 相比,在觉醒期间(约 4000K)照度和光谱保持不变,DLS 使主工作区(1 级)的白光照度和短波长(蓝色)含量增加约三倍,直到睡前 3 小时,此时照度降低约 96%,整个蓝色含量也降低(4000K×2h,3000K×1h)直到睡觉时间。平均(±SE)尿 6-硫酸褪黑素(aMT6s)峰值时间在 SLS 中明显晚于 DLS(6.22±0.34h),并且 SLS 中的变异性大于 DLS(分别为 37.2±3.6min 和 28.2±2.4min,p=0.04)。与 DLS 相比,自我报告的睡眠在 SLS 中相对于昼夜节律相位更频繁地失准(RR:6.75,95%CI 1.55-29.36,p=0.01),但在两种照明条件下,自我报告的睡眠时间和入睡潜伏期均无差异。与 SLS 相比,DLS 中的抽象匹配和矩阵推理测试的准确性明显更高(经错误发现率校正的 p 值≤0.04)。总的来说,DLS 缓解了在太空模拟研究中通常观察到的昼夜节律相位漂移,并减少了在不利昼夜节律相位发生的自我报告的睡眠发作的发生率。我们的研究结果支持在未来任务中采用 DLS,这可能有助于适当的昼夜节律对齐,并降低睡眠中断的风险。