Nguyen Katrina, Dunbar Claire, Guyett Alisha, Bickley Kelsey, Nguyen Duc Phuc, Reynolds Amy C, Catcheside Peter, Scott Hannah, Hughes Maslin, Adams Robert, Lack Leon, Cori Jennifer, Howard Mark E, Anderson Clare, Stevens David, Lovato Nicole, Vakulin Andrew
Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute: Sleep Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Austin Health, Institute for Breathing and Sleep, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
J Sleep Res. 2025 Aug;34(4):e14455. doi: 10.1111/jsr.14455. Epub 2025 Jan 13.
Sleepiness-related errors are a leading cause of driving accidents, requiring drivers to effectively monitor sleepiness levels. However, there are inter-individual differences in driving performance after sleep loss, with some showing poor driving performance while others show minimal impairment. This research explored if there are differences in self-reported sleepiness and driving performance in healthy drivers who exhibited vulnerability or resistance to objective driving impairment following extended wakefulness. Thirty-two adults (female = 18, mean age = 33.0 ± 14.6 years) completed five × 60-min simulated drives across 29-hr of extended wakefulness. Subjective sleepiness (Karolinska Sleepiness Scale) and subjective driving performance ratings (nine-point Likert scale) were assessed at 10-min intervals while driving. Cluster analysis using simulator steering deviation and crash data categorised participants as vulnerable (n = 16) or resistant (n = 16) to driving impairments following extended wakefulness. No differences in self-ratings between the vulnerable and resistant groups were observed except during the last drive (25 hr awake), where the vulnerable group reported higher sleepiness (p = 0.008) and worse driving performance (p = 0.001) than the resistant group. For each 1-point increase on the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale and subjective driving scales, the vulnerable group showed about threefold greater steering impairment relative to resistant drivers. Although self-reported sleepiness and driving performance were correlated with objective driving performance, vulnerable drivers reported similar sleepiness and driving performance as resistant drivers. Thus, self-reported sleepiness and driving performance are not reliably sensitive to sleep loss effects on objective driving performance, which may impact the vulnerable driver's decisions to continue driving and delay engagement in countermeasures to reduce crash risk (e.g. napping), warranting further research.
与困倦相关的失误是导致交通事故的主要原因，这就要求驾驶员有效监测困倦程度。然而，睡眠不足后驾驶表现存在个体差异，有些人驾驶表现不佳，而另一些人则几乎没有受到损害。本研究探讨了在长时间清醒后对客观驾驶损害表现出易感性或抵抗力的健康驾驶员在自我报告的困倦程度和驾驶表现方面是否存在差异。32名成年人（女性18名，平均年龄33.0±14.6岁）在29小时的长时间清醒期间完成了5次×60分钟的模拟驾驶。在驾驶过程中，每隔10分钟评估一次主观困倦程度（卡罗林斯卡困倦量表）和主观驾驶表现评分（九点李克特量表）。使用模拟器转向偏差和碰撞数据进行聚类分析，将参与者分为长时间清醒后对驾驶损害易感的组（n = 16）或有抵抗力的组（n = 16）。除了最后一次驾驶（清醒25小时）外，易感组和有抵抗力组之间在自我评分上没有观察到差异，在最后一次驾驶中，易感组报告的困倦程度更高（p = 0.008），驾驶表现更差（p = 0.001）。在卡罗林斯卡困倦量表和主观驾驶量表上每增加1分，易感组相对于有抵抗力的驾驶员表现出的转向损害大约大三倍。尽管自我报告的困倦程度和驾驶表现与客观驾驶表现相关，但易感驾驶员报告的困倦程度和驾驶表现与有抵抗力的驾驶员相似。因此，自我报告的困倦程度和驾驶表现对睡眠不足对客观驾驶表现的影响并不具有可靠的敏感性，这可能会影响易感驾驶员继续驾驶的决定，并延迟采取减少碰撞风险的对策（如小睡），这值得进一步研究。
