Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “NaP”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

153 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Sleep Obtained by Cabin Crewmembers during a Long-haul Flight

Sleep loss and circadian disruption pose a significant risk in safety-sensitive occupations. In aviation, many studies have demonstrated how inflight rest locations influence alertness and performance among pilots, but few studies have evaluated cabin crew. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate sleep outcomes among cabin crewmembers sleeping in a bunk compared to a jump seat during one long-haul route. Thirty-one (6 male) cabin crewmembers (age M = 30, SD = +/-13) flew the same long-haul route (outbound and return) with a flight duration of 10:41 (± 0:14) hours. Participants were randomly assigned to fly on an aircraft with a bunk or a jump seat for their sleep opportunity. Participants wore an Actiwatch (Phillips-Respironics Spectrum) throughout the entire study and completed a sleep diary at bedtime and upon waking. During flight they completed a nap diary entering the start time of the inflight sleep (if any) and the duration. Sixty-five flights (32 outbound and 33 return) were included in the analyses. Seventy-seven percent of the flights had a bunk and 23% had a jump seat. Crewmembers obtained M = 146.46 (± 67.20) minutes of rest out of which they slept M = 125.33 (± 64.91) minutes in the bunk. While using the jump seat, crewmembers obtained M = 169.53 (± 133.30) minutes of rest out of which they slept M = 142.92 (± 149.72) minutes. When crewmembers slept in the bunk, sleep latency was shorter (M = 13.69 ± 12.64 minutes) and efficiency was better (M = 76.16 ± 16.09 %) compared to the jump seat (sleep onset: M = 16.77 ± 13.89 minutes; sleep efficiency: M = 60.64 ± 17.42 %). We found that cabin crewmembers slept for longer time when they used the jump seat. They fell asleep faster and their sleep efficiency was better when using the bunk compared to the jump seat. Further research is needed to understand how sleep quality and subsequent performance are influenced by sleep opportunity in a bunk compared to a jump seat.

cabin crewmembers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Rise and Shine: Using Light as a Countermeasure to Sleep Inertia

INTRODUCTION: Sleep inertia describes the phenomenon of sleepiness and poor performance experienced after waking from sleep. This period of impaired alertness and performance is of significant concern to workers who nap on shift, or work on-call and are required to perform safety-critical tasks soon after waking (e.g., emergency services, healthcare, military). Light has been shown to acutely improve alertness during sleep deprivation and circadian misalignment. In this study, we assessed the efficacy of blue-enriched light to improve alertness and mood immediately after waking from SWS, i.e., during the sleep inertia period. METHODS: Twelve participants kept a sleep schedule of 8.5 h for 5 nights and 5 h for one night prior to the overnight laboratory visit (confirmed by actigraphy). Participants went to bed at their scheduled habitual bedtime in the laboratory and were monitored by standard polysomnography. After at least 5 min of SWS, participants were awoken and exposed to either red ambient light (control) or blue-enriched light (light) for 1 h. During this time, participants completed a subjective scale of alertness (Karolinska Sleepiness Scale, KSS) and visual analogue scales (VAS) of mood at 2 min, 17 min, 32 min, and 47 min after waking. Following this sleep inertia measurement period, all lights were turned off and participants were allowed to return to sleep. They were then awoken again from their subsequent SWS period and exposed to the opposite condition (control or light). A linear mixed-effects model with fixed effects of condition, time, and condition*time and a random effect of participant was used to determine the impact of light across the testing period. An average of baseline responses (pre-sleep) was included as a covariate. RESULTS: Compared to the control condition, participants exposed to blue-enriched light reported feeling more alert (KSS: F1,77=4.955, p=.029; VASalert: F1,77=8.226, p=.005), more cheerful (VAScheerful: F1,77=8.615, p=.004), less depressed (VASdepressed: F1,77=4.649, p=.034), and less lethargic (VASlethargic: F1,77=5.652, p=.020). DISCUSSION: Exposure to blue-enriched light immediately after waking from SWS may help to improve subjective alertness and mood. Future analyses will explore whether these findings extend to effects on cognitive performance. This countermeasure to sleep inertia may be suitable for implementation to alert crew members during mid-sleep emergencies but requires further testing in field settings.

alertness↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Controlled Rest: Investigating the Use of an In-Flight Sleepiness Countermeasure

INTRODUCTION: Sleepiness is commonly reported amongst commercial airline pilots and is recognized as a safety risk due to its impact on performance. Controlled Rest (CR) refers to a short, voluntary nap opportunity taken by pilots on the flight deck as a countermeasure to unanticipated sleepiness in flight. This study explores the profile of CR use in a long-haul commercial airline. METHODS: Forty-four pilots filled in an application-based sleep/work diary and wore actiwatches for approximately 2 weeks. Complete data sets from 239 flights including sleep diaries, actigraphy, and schedules were merged and analyzed. Sleep diary entries were used to set CR intervals in the actigraphy software, which was then used to predict sleep within these intervals. All time-stamps of sleep periods and flight schedules were adjusted for home-base time of the pilots. Pearson Correlations were used to assess the influence of pilot demographics on CR use. A mixed-effects logistic regression was used to analyze the impact of schedule factors on CR. RESULTS: Pilots reported taking CR on 46% (n=110) of observed flights. Average CR attempt duration was 43.1 ± 11.0 minutes. Eighty-percent (n=106/133) of all CR attempts were estimated by actigraphy to have successfully achieved sleep with an average sleep duration during successful rest periods of 31.7 ± 12.2 minutes. Captains reported taking CR on 38% of flights (n=39/102), compared to First Officers reporting 52% (n=71/137) of flights with CR (p=0.131). Age, experience, BMI, and sleep need were not associated with the percentage of flights with CR (all p>0.244). The following schedule factors were associated with a higher frequency of CR: night (55%, n=76) vs. day flights (34%, n=34); <10h (63%, n=80) vs. >10h duration flights (27%, n=30); return (60%, n=71) vs. outbound flights (33%, n=39); and 2-pilot (69%, n=83) vs. >2-pilot flights (23%, n=27) (all p≤0.001). There was a trend for more CR on eastbound flights, but this was not significant (eastbound: 51%, n= 57; westbound: 40%, n= 44; p=0.059). Of note, 22% (n=26) of augmented flights (>2-pilots) contained both CR and Bunk Rest (in a designated rest facility). DISCUSSION: Data from this airline show that pilots commonly use CR to mitigate sleepiness in-flight, especially on flights <10h duration and during home-base nighttime flights. Future studies are required to determine generalizability of these results to other airlines.

sleepiness↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Changes in Alertness and Performance Over Time During Long-Haul Flying Across Multiple Time Zones

BACKGROUND: Long-haul pilots experience high levels of fatigue and circadian disruptions due to long work hours and flying over multiple time zones. The aim of this study was to describe changes in alertness and performance among flight crews during long-haul flights crossing multiple time zones. METHODS: All pilots flying long-haul operations from a single airline were eligible to participate. All participants collected data for ~2 weeks of their normal work schedule within airline operations, with at least two long-haul rotations, including rest days and layovers. Participants wore an Actiwach throughout the entire study period and completed a sleep diary (at bedtime, upon waking up and after each nap). Each participant completed a 5-min Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) and a Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) pre-flight, on top-of-descent (TOD; inflight) and at the end of each flight (post-flight). Response speed (1/RT x 1000), lapses (RT > 500 ms), and alertness were assessed over time pre-flight, TOD, post-flight, using mixed-effects models with participant as a random factor. Linear models were assumed for response speed and alertness, while a negative binomial distribution was specified for lapses due to overdispersion. RESULTS: Forty-four long-haul pilots participated in the study (5 female; mean age 44.25 ± 10.06 yrs; mean flight hours 9834.3; ± 5334.1 hrs). Lapses increased post-flight relative to pre-flight (F(2, 665) = 3.67, p < 0.05). There was a main effect of response speed (F(2, 665) = 21.45, p < 0.001) with slower speed inflight and postflight compared to preflight (p < 0.001). The KSS increased over time from M = 4.02 (± 1.35) preflight to M = 5.15 (± 1.58) inflight, to M = 6.7 (± 1.51) postflight (F(2, 701) = 182.63, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Our preliminary analyses showed that both performance and subjective alertness worsened from the beginning to the end of a flight. Additional analyses will be conducted to investigate the changes in alertness and performance by direction of travel, sleep history, and flight timing and duration.

long-haul↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Can Pre-Flight Subjective Sleepiness Predict the Use of Controlled Rest on the Flight Deck?

Pilot sleepiness in flight continues to be an issue in aviation due to irregular and extended working hours. In some regions of the world, pilots are allowed to use an in-flight countermeasure called controlled rest, which involves taking a short nap on the flight deck. The use of this countermeasure in practice is understudied. We aimed to investigate whether subjective sleepiness ratings taken pre-flight are predictive of controlled rest use.

aviation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Investigating the Causes and Consequences of Controlled Rest on the Flight Deck

INTRODUCTION: Long and irregular working hours can lead to fatigue in aviation operations. In some regions, a short nap taken on the flight deck (known as controlled rest) can be used as a countermeasure to unexpected in-flight sleepiness. We aimed to investigate the impact of taking controlled rest on self-reported sleepiness at top-of-descent. METHODS: Data from 120 long-haul (> 6 h flight duration), unaugmented flights were analyzed (n = 31 pilots). Pilots wore actigraphs and completed sleep logs before and during trips. At pre-flight and top-of-descent, pilots completed a Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS). A mixed-effects model was used to assess the impact of controlled rest on KSS at top-of-descent. Sleep duration in the 48 hours prior to departure, timing of the flight (day vs. night), and pre-flight KSS scores were included as covariates. RESULTS: Due to missing data, complete data from 83 flights (n = 29 participants) were available in the analyses of the KSS. There were no differences by controlled rest status for KSS scores at top-of-descent (estimated marginal means ± SEM with controlled rest: 5.10 ± 0.22, without controlled rest: 5.37 ± 0.29; p = .45, η2p = 0.01). DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that there is no difference in self-reported sleepiness at top-of-descent on flights in which controlled rest was taken compared to flights without controlled rest. Further research is necessary to determine the impact of controlled rest on objective measures of performance at top-of-descent.

aviation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Jet Lag, Sleep Timing, and Sleep Inertia

This chapter explores the causes, consequences, and countermeasures of jet lag, mistimed sleep, and sleep inertia. Jet lag can occur when rapidly crossing multiple time zones (e.g., trans-meridian travel for long-haul pilots). The desynchrony between the body’s biological clock, or circadian rhythm, and the new day-night cycle can lead to indigestion, sleep disturbances, fatigue, and cognitive impairments. Mistimed sleep can also occur within a time zone. In the case of night shiftwork, sleep is displaced to the daytime which leads to poor sleep and increased fatigue at night due to the combination of pressures from the two-process model of sleep regulation: sleep loss (homeostatic pressure); and being awake when the body is promoting sleep (circadian pressure). There is also a third process of sleep regulation called sleep inertia, which refers to the brief period of fatigue and impaired cognitive performance experienced after waking. Sleep inertia can be a fatigue risk for transportation workers who work on-call (e.g., emergency services) or who nap on shift (e.g., long-haul truck drivers) and are required to perform a safety-critical task soon after waking. For each of these fatigue risks, strategic exposure to bright light can be used to help realign sleep timing and to promote alertness.

sleep inertia↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Impact of Controlled Rest on Neurobehavioral Outcomes at Top-of-Descent

INTRODUCTION: Long and irregular working hours can lead to fatigue in aviation operations. In some regions, a short nap taken on the flight deck (known as controlled rest) can be used as a countermeasure to unexpected in-flight sleepiness. We aimed to investigate the impact of taking controlled rest on neurobehavioral measures at top-of-descent. METHODS: Data from 120 long-haul (> 6 h flight duration), unaugmented flights were analyzed (n = 31 pilots). Pilots wore actigraphs and completed sleep logs before and during trips. At pre-flight and top-of-descent, pilots completed a 5-minute psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) and Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS). A series of mixed-effects models were conducted to assess the impact of controlled rest on outcome measures at top-of-descent. Sleep duration in the prior 48 hours, timing of the flight, and pre-flight scores for each measure were included as covariates. RESULTS: Due to missing data, complete data from 76 flights (n = 28 participants) were available in the models examining the PVT metrics, and data from 83 flights (n = 29 participants) were available in the analyses of the KSS. Pilots who took controlled rest had faster response speeds at top-of-descent (p = .03, η2p = 0.07; estimated marginal mean [EMM] = 4.19, standard error [SE] = 0.07, 95% CI [4.08, 4.29]) than those who did not take controlled rest (EMM = 4.00, SE = 0.05, 95% CI [3.86, 4.14]). There were no differences by controlled rest status for KSS scores and PVT lapses (p values > .05, η2p values ≤ 0.01). DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that taking controlled rest may improve vigilant attention at critical phases of flight and, thus, may be a useful fatigue management tool during unaugmented flights. Further research is necessary to determine the impact of factors on the decision to take controlled rest (e.g., airline culture, personal preference) and how the controlled rest policy is applied in practice.

aviation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Impact of Controlled Rest on Self-Reported Sleepiness at Top-of-Descent

INTRODUCTION: Long and irregular working hours can lead to fatigue in aviation operations. In some regions, a short nap taken on the flight deck (known as controlled rest) can be used as a countermeasure to unexpected in-flight sleepiness. We aimed to investigate the impact of taking controlled rest on self-reported sleepiness at top-of-descent. METHODS: Data from 120 long-haul (> 6 h flight duration), unaugmented flights were analyzed (n = 31 pilots). Pilots wore actigraphs and completed sleep logs before and during trips. At pre-flight and top-of-descent, pilots completed a Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS). A mixed-effects model was used to assess the impact of controlled rest on KSS at top-of-descent. Sleep duration in the 48 hours prior to departure, timing of the flight (day vs. night), and pre-flight KSS scores were included as covariates. RESULTS: Due to missing data, complete data from 83 flights (n = 29 participants) were available in the analyses of the KSS. There were no differences by controlled rest status for KSS scores at top-of-descent (estimated marginal means ± SEM with controlled rest: 5.10 ± 0.22, without controlled rest: 5.37 ± 0.29; p = .45, η2p = 0.01). DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that there is no difference in self-reported sleepiness at top-of-descent on flights in which controlled rest was taken compared to flights without controlled rest. Further research is necessary to determine the impact of controlled rest on objective measures of performance at top-of-descent.

aviation↗