Comparison of Two Watch Schedules for Personnel at the White House Military Office President's Emergency Operations Center

Adapting shift work schedules for sleep quality, sleep duration, and sleepiness in shift workers

BACKGROUND

Shift work is associated with insufficient sleep, which can compromise worker alertness with ultimate effects on occupational health and safety. Adapting shift work schedules may reduce adverse occupational outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of shift schedule adaptation on sleep quality, sleep duration, and sleepiness among shift workers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and eight other databases on 13 December 2020, and again on 20 April 2022, applying no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, including controlled before-after (CBA) trials, interrupted time series, and cross-over trials. Eligible trials evaluated any of the following shift schedule components. • Permanency of shifts • Regularity of shift changes • Direction of shift rotation • Speed of rotation • Shift duration • Timing of start of shifts • Distribution of shift schedule • Time off between shifts • Split shifts • Protected sleep • Worker participation We included studies that assessed sleep quality off-shift, sleep duration off-shift, or sleepiness during shifts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of the records recovered by the search, read through the full-text articles of potentially eligible studies, and extracted data. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, with specific additional domains for non-randomised and cluster-randomised studies. For all stages, we resolved any disagreements by consulting a third review author. We presented the results by study design and combined clinically homogeneous studies in meta-analyses using random-effects models. We assessed the certainty of the evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies with a total of 2125 participants. One study was conducted in a laboratory setting and was not considered for drawing conclusions on intervention effects. The included studies investigated different and often multiple changes to shift schedule, and were heterogeneous with respect to outcome measurement. Forward versus backward rotation Three CBA trials (561 participants) investigated the effects of forward rotation versus backward rotation. Only one CBA trial provided sufficient data for the quantitative analysis; it provided very low-certainty evidence that forward rotation compared with backward rotation did not affect sleep quality measured with the Basic Nordic Sleep Questionnaire (BNSQ; mean difference (MD) -0.20 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.28 to 1.89; 62 participants) or sleep duration off-shift (MD -0.21 hours, 95% CI -3.29 to 2.88; 62 participants). However, there was also very low-certainty evidence that forward rotation reduced sleepiness during shifts measured with the BNSQ (MD -1.24 points, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.24; 62 participants). Faster versus slower rotation Two CBA trials and one non-randomised cross-over trial (341 participants) evaluated faster versus slower shift rotation. We were able to meta-analyse data from two studies. There was low-certainty evidence of no difference in sleep quality off-shift (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.23) and very low-certainty evidence that faster shift rotation reduced sleep duration off-shift (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.01; 2 studies, 282 participants). The SMD for sleep duration translated to an MD of 0.38 hours' less sleep per day (95% CI -0.74 to -0.01). One study provided very low-certainty evidence that faster rotations decreased sleepiness during shifts measured with the BNSQ (MD -1.24 points, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.24; 62 participants). Limited shift duration (16 hours) versus unlimited shift duration Two RCTs (760 participants) evaluated 80-hour workweeks with maximum daily shift duration of 16 hours versus workweeks without any daily shift duration limits. There was low-certainty evidence that the 16-hour limit increased sleep duration off-shift (SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.78; which translated to an MD of 0.73 hours' more sleep per day, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.13; 2 RCTs, 760 participants) and moderate-certainty evidence that the 16-hour limit reduced sleepiness during shifts, measured with the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.14; which translated to an MD of 0.37 fewer points, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.17; 2 RCTs, 716 participants). Shorter versus longer shifts One RCT, one CBA trial, and one non-randomised cross-over trial (692 participants) evaluated shorter shift duration (eight to 10 hours) versus longer shift duration (two to three hours longer). There was very low-certainty evidence of no difference in sleep quality (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.15; which translated to an MD of 0.13 points lower on a scale of 1 to 5; 2 studies, 111 participants) or sleep duration off-shift (SMD 0.18, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.54; which translated to an MD of 0.26 hours' less sleep per day; 2 studies, 121 participants). The RCT and the non-randomised cross-over study found that shorter shifts reduced sleepiness during shifts, while the CBA study found no effect on sleepiness. More compressed versus more spread out shift schedules One RCT and one CBA trial (346 participants) evaluated more compressed versus more spread out shift schedules. The CBA trial provided very low-certainty evidence of no difference between the groups in sleep quality off-shift (MD 0.31 points, 95% CI -0.53 to 1.15) and sleep duration off-shift (MD 0.52 hours, 95% CI -0.52 to 1.56).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Forward and faster rotation may reduce sleepiness during shifts, and may make no difference to sleep quality, but the evidence is very uncertain. Very low-certainty evidence indicated that sleep duration off-shift decreases with faster rotation. Low-certainty evidence indicated that on-duty workweeks with shift duration limited to 16 hours increases sleep duration, with moderate-certainty evidence for minimal reductions in sleepiness. Changes in shift duration and compression of workweeks had no effect on sleep or sleepiness, but the evidence was of very low-certainty. No evidence is available for other shift schedule changes. There is a need for more high-quality studies (preferably RCTs) for all shift schedule interventions to draw conclusions on the effects of shift schedule adaptations on sleep and sleepiness in shift workers.

The Overtraining Syndrome in Soldiers: Insights from the Sports Domain

INTRODUCTION

Soldiers are exposed to extreme training regimens in order to optimally prepare for real battle. High attrition rates are a known issue during training courses, especially for elite troops. An underlying factor might be the disbalance between stress/strain and recovery. The aim of this review is to give insight in the current knowledge about functional overreaching (FOR), non-FOR (NFOR), and the overtraining syndrome (OTS) in the military.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted. PubMed, IngentaConnect, Science Direct, and Web of Science were screened for the following keywords and combinations of search terms; military, personnel, OT, soldier.

RESULTS

Seven studies investigating the effects of OT during training courses were selected. The definitions used for OT varied widely and there is no systematic use of markers to determine FOR, NFOR, or the OTS in the military.

CONCLUSIONS

Much research on NFOR/OTS has been conducted in the sports domain and the military could make use of these insights to promote a more efficient balance between training load and recovery. It is suggested to regularly test soldiers on physical performance, psychomotor speed and mood using ideally a military-specific test or the 1.5-mile run, psychomotor vigilance test and Profile of Mood States. The two-bout exercise test can be used as a specific test if previous testing indicates the development of NFOR/OTS and can be combined with metabolic and immunological testing to exclude pathological causes.

Improving Work and Rest Patterns of Military Personnel in Operational Settings with Frequent Unplanned Events

Members of the military get inadequate sleep due to a variety of reasons. Reduced manning, extended work hours, shiftwork schedules that result in circadian misalignment – all of these factors contribute to the sleep debt and degraded alertness observed in much of the military population. The issue of watchstanding schedules, performance, and alertness is of critical importance to the US military and is the focus of the current study. Based on a sample of active duty military members (N=75), this study had two goals. First, to conduct a field-based monitoring of the sleep and performance of military personnel while performing their duties. Second, to create and validate optimal recommendations based on the results of this empirical study. Participants wore actigraphs over a two-week period, completed daily activity logs, and took three-minute reaction time tests before and after standing watch on their regular schedules. Participants worked on a 2-day on/2-day off schedule, either in 3-section 8-hour shifts, or 2-section 12-hour shifts. Although there were no significant differences in the sleep amounts between the two schedules, results showed that participants on 8-hr shifts had fewer errors and less variable reaction time performance than those working 12-hr shifts. The 8-hr group reported better sleep quality, too. Our results suggest that the 8-hour schedule is better than the 12-hour schedule in terms of sleep and performance but may be more difficult to be applied. This study clearly shows the difficulty of implementing a specific watchstanding schedule in operational environments overloaded with unplanned, and irregular operational duties.