Engineering topics

Dinges, David F.

Publications and source records attributed to Dinges, David F..

14 records

NASA NTRS2009

Psychomotor Vigilance Self Test on ISS (Reaction Self Test on Expeditions 21 and 22)

The experiment addresses the following high-priority NASA Risk Gaps in the Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP) area: 1) Identify brief, valid objective measures of changes in cognitive functions during spaceflight that astronauts can use with minimal burden. 2) Find a practical objective aid for astronauts to quickly identify and manage the effects of fatigue (from sleep loss, circadian disruptions, workload and other factors) on their performance during space flight.

Dinges, David F.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Summary of the key features of seven biomathematical models of human fatigue and performance

BACKGROUND: Biomathematical models that quantify the effects of circadian and sleep/wake processes on the regulation of alertness and performance have been developed in an effort to predict the magnitude and timing of fatigue-related responses in a variety of contexts (e.g., transmeridian travel, sustained operations, shift work). This paper summarizes key features of seven biomathematical models reviewed as part of the Fatigue and Performance Modeling Workshop held in Seattle, WA, on June 13-14, 2002. The Workshop was jointly sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Office of Naval Research, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, and U.S. Department of Transportation. METHODS: An invitation was sent to developers of seven biomathematical models that were commonly cited in scientific literature and/or supported by government funding. On acceptance of the invitation to attend the Workshop, developers were asked to complete a survey of the goals, capabilities, inputs, and outputs of their biomathematical models of alertness and performance. Data from the completed surveys were summarized and juxtaposed to provide a framework for comparing features of the seven models. RESULTS: Survey responses revealed that models varied greatly relative to their reported goals and capabilities. While all modelers reported that circadian factors were key components of their capabilities, they differed markedly with regard to the roles of sleep and work times as input factors for prediction: four of the seven models had work time as their sole input variable(s), while the other three models relied on various aspects of sleep timing for model input. Models also differed relative to outputs: five sought to predict results from laboratory experiments, field, and operational data, while two models were developed without regard to predicting laboratory experimental results. All modelers provided published papers describing their models, with three of the models being proprietary. CONCLUSIONS: Although all models appear to have been fundamentally influenced by the two-process model of sleep regulation by Borbely, there is considerable diversity among them in the number and type of input and output variables, and their stated goals and capabilities.

Fatigue/physiopathology↗

NASA NTRS2003

Investigating the interaction between the homeostatic and circadian processes of sleep-wake regulation for the prediction of waking neurobehavioural performance

The two-process model of sleep regulation has been applied successfully to describe, predict, and understand sleep-wake regulation in a variety of experimental protocols such as sleep deprivation and forced desynchrony. A non-linear interaction between the homeostatic and circadian processes was reported when the model was applied to describe alertness and performance data obtained during forced desynchrony. This non-linear interaction could also be due to intrinsic non-linearity in the metrics used to measure alertness and performance, however. Distinguishing these possibilities would be of theoretical interest, but could also have important implications for the design and interpretation of experiments placing sleep at different circadian phases or varying the duration of sleep and/or wakefulness. Although to date no resolution to this controversy has been found, here we show that the issue can be addressed with existing data sets. The interaction between the homeostatic and circadian processes of sleep-wake regulation was investigated using neurobehavioural performance data from a laboratory experiment involving total sleep deprivation. The results provided evidence of an actual non-linear interaction between the homeostatic and circadian processes of sleep-wake regulation for the prediction of waking neurobehavioural performance.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS2003

The cumulative cost of additional wakefulness: dose-response effects on neurobehavioral functions and sleep physiology from chronic sleep restriction and total sleep deprivation

OBJECTIVES: To inform the debate over whether human sleep can be chronically reduced without consequences, we conducted a dose-response chronic sleep restriction experiment in which waking neurobehavioral and sleep physiological functions were monitored and compared to those for total sleep deprivation. DESIGN: The chronic sleep restriction experiment involved randomization to one of three sleep doses (4 h, 6 h, or 8 h time in bed per night), which were maintained for 14 consecutive days. The total sleep deprivation experiment involved 3 nights without sleep (0 h time in bed). Each study also involved 3 baseline (pre-deprivation) days and 3 recovery days. SETTING: Both experiments were conducted under standardized laboratory conditions with continuous behavioral, physiological and medical monitoring. PARTICIPANTS: A total of n = 48 healthy adults (ages 21-38) participated in the experiments. INTERVENTIONS: Noctumal sleep periods were restricted to 8 h, 6 h or 4 h per day for 14 days, or to 0 h for 3 days. All other sleep was prohibited. RESULTS: Chronic restriction of sleep periods to 4 h or 6 h per night over 14 consecutive days resulted in significant cumulative, dose-dependent deficits in cognitive performance on all tasks. Subjective sleepiness ratings showed an acute response to sleep restriction but only small further increases on subsequent days, and did not significantly differentiate the 6 h and 4 h conditions. Polysomnographic variables and delta power in the non-REM sleep EEG-a putative marker of sleep homeostasis--displayed an acute response to sleep restriction with negligible further changes across the 14 restricted nights. Comparison of chronic sleep restriction to total sleep deprivation showed that the latter resulted in disproportionately large waking neurobehavioral and sleep delta power responses relative to how much sleep was lost. A statistical model revealed that, regardless of the mode of sleep deprivation, lapses in behavioral alertness were near-linearly related to the cumulative duration of wakefulness in excess of 15.84 h (s.e. 0.73 h). CONCLUSIONS: Since chronic restriction of sleep to 6 h or less per night produced cognitive performance deficits equivalent to up to 2 nights of total sleep deprivation, it appears that even relatively moderate sleep restriction can seriously impair waking neurobehavioral functions in healthy adults. Sleepiness ratings suggest that subjects were largely unaware of these increasing cognitive deficits, which may explain why the impact of chronic sleep restriction on waking cognitive functions is often assumed to be benign. Physiological sleep responses to chronic restriction did not mirror waking neurobehavioral responses, but cumulative wakefulness in excess of a 15.84 h predicted performance lapses across all four experimental conditions. This suggests that sleep debt is perhaps best understood as resulting in additional wakefulness that has a neurobiological "cost" which accumulates over time.

NASA Discipline Regulatory Physiology↗

NASA NTRS2002

Controlled breaks as a fatigue countermeasure on the flight deck

BACKGROUND: A major challenge for flight crews is the need to maintain vigilance during long, highly automated nighttime flights. No system currently exists to assist in managing alertness, and countermeasure options are limited. Surveys reveal many pilots use breaks as an in-flight countermeasure, but there have been no controlled studies of their effectiveness. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that brief, regular breaks could improve alertness and performance during an overnight flight. METHOD: A 6-h, uneventful, nighttime flight in a Boeing 747-400 flight simulator was flown by fourteen two-man crews. The 14 subjects in the treatment group received 5 short breaks spaced hourly during cruise; the 14 subjects in the control group received 1 break in the middle of cruise. Continuous EEG/EOG, subjective sleepiness, and psychomotor vigilance performance data were collected. RESULTS: During the latter part of the night, the treatment group showed significant reductions for 15 min post-break in slow eye movements, theta-band activity, and unintended sleep episodes compared with the control group. The treatment group reported significantly greater subjective alertness for up to 25 min post-break, with strongest effects near the time of the circadian trough. There was no evidence of objective vigilance performance improvement at 15-25 min post-break, with expected performance deterioration occurring due to elevated sleep drive and circadian time. CONCLUSIONS: The physiological and subjective data indicate the breaks reduced nighttime sleepiness for at least 15 min post-break and may have masked sleepiness for up to 25 min, suggesting the potential usefulness of short-duration breaks as an in-flight fatigue countermeasure.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS2000

Crew Factors in Flight Operations XII: A Survey of Sleep Quantity and Quality in On-Board Crew Rest Facilities

Many aircraft operated on long-haul commercial airline flights are equipped with on-board crew rest facilities, or bunks, to allow crewmembers to rest during the flight. The primary objectives of this study were to gather data on how the bunks were used, the quantity and quality of sleep obtained by flight crewmembers in the facilities, and the factors that affected their sleep. A retrospective survey comprising 54 questions of varied format addressed demographics, home sleep habits, and bunk sleep habits. Crewmembers from three airlines with long-haul fleets carrying augmented crews consisting of B747-100/200, B747-400, and MD-11 aircraft equipped with bunks returned a total of 1404 completed surveys (a 37% response rate). Crewmembers from the three carriers were comparable demographically, although one carrier had older, more experienced flight crewmembers. Each group, on average, rated themselves as "good" or "very good" sleepers at home, and all groups obtained about the same average amount of sleep each night. Most were able to sleep in the bunks, and about two thirds indicated that these rest opportunities benefited their subsequent flight deck alertness and performance. Comfort, environment, and physiology (e.g., being ready for sleep) were identified as factors that most promoted sleep. Factors cited as interfering with sleep included random noise, thoughts, heat, and the need to use the bathroom. These factors, in turn, suggest potential improvements to bunk facilities and their use. Ratings of the three aircraft types suggested differences among facilities. Bunks in the MD-11 were rated significantly better than either of the B747 types, and the B747-400 bunks received better ratings than did the older, B747-100/200 facilities.

Rosekind, Mark R.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Countermeasures to Neurobehavioral Deficits from Cumulative Partial Sleep Deprivation During Space Flight

This project is concerned with identifying ways to prevent neurobehavioral and physical deterioration due to inadequate sleep in astronauts during long-duration manned space flight. The performance capability of astronauts during extended-duration space flight depends heavily on achieving recovery through adequate sleep. Even with appropriate circadian alignment, sleep loss can erode fundamental elements of human performance capability including vigilance, cognitive speed and accuracy, working memory, reaction time, and physiological alertness. Adequate sleep is essential during manned space flight not only to ensure high levels of safe and effective human performance, but also as a basic regulatory biology critical to healthy human functioning. There is now extensive objective evidence that astronaut sleep is frequently restricted in space flight to averages between 4 hr and 6.5 hr/day. Chronic sleep restriction during manned space flight can occur in response to endogenous disturbances of sleep (motion sickness, stress, circadian rhythms), environmental disruptions of sleep (noise, temperature, light), and curtailment of sleep due to the work demands and other activities that accompany extended space flight operations. The mechanism through which this risk emerges is the development of cumulative homeostatic pressure for sleep across consecutive days of inadequate sleep. Research has shown that the physiological sleepiness and performance deficits engendered by sleep debt can progressively worsen (i.e., accumulate) over consecutive days of sleep restriction, and that sleep limited to levels commonly experienced by astronauts (i.e., 4 - 6 hr per night) for as little as 1 week, can result in increased lapses of attention, degradation of response times, deficits in complex problem solving, reduced learning, mood disturbance, disruption of essential neuroendocrine, metabolic, and neuroimmune responses, and in some vulnerable persons, the emergence of uncontrolled sleep attacks. The prevention of cumulative performance deficits and neuroendocrine disruption from sleep restriction during extended duration space flight involves finding the most effective ways to obtain sleep in order to maintain the high-level cognitive and physical performance functions required for manned space flight. There is currently a critical deficiency in knowledge of the effects of how variations in sleep duration and timing relate to the most efficient return of performance per unit time invested in sleep during long-duration missions, and how the nature of sleep physiology (i.e., sleep stages, sleep electroencephalographic [EEG] power spectral analyses) change as a function of sleep restriction and performance degradation. The primary aim of this project is to meet these critical deficiencies through utilization of a response surface experimental paradigm, testing in a dose-response manner, varying combinations of sleep duration and timing, for the purpose of establishing how to most effectively limit the cumulative adverse effects on human performance and physiology of chronic sleep restriction in space operations.

Dinges, David F.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Crew Alertness Management on the Flight Deck: Cognitive and Vigilance Performance

This project had three broad goals: (1) to identify environmental and organismic risks to performance of long-haul cockpit crews; (2) to assess how cognitive and psychomotor vigilance performance, and subjective measures of alertness, were affected by work-rest schedules typical of long-haul cockpit crews; and (3) to determine the alertness-promoting effectiveness of behavioral and technological countermeasures to fatigue on the flight deck. During the course of the research, a number of studies were completed in cooperation with the NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures Program. The publications emerging from this project are listed in a bibliography in the appendix. Progress toward these goals will be summarized below according to the period in which it was accomplished.

Dinges, David F.↗

NASA NTRS1996

Principles and Guidelines for Duty and Rest Scheduling in Commercial Aviation

The aviation industry requires 24-hour activities to meet operational demands. Growth in global long-haul, regional, overnight cargo, and short-haul domestic operations will continue to increase these round-the-clock requirements. Flight crews must be available to support 24-hour-a-day operations to meet these industry demands. Both domestic and international aviation can also require crossing multiple time zones. Therefore, shift work, night work, irregular work schedules, unpredictable work schedules, and dm zone changes will continue to be commonplace components of the aviation industry. These factors pose known challenges to human physiology, and because they result in performance-impairing fatigue, they pose a risk to safety. It is critical to acknowledge and, whenever possible, incorporate scientific information on fatigue, human sleep, and circadian physiology into 24-hour aviation operations. Utilization of such scientific information can help promote crew performance and alertness during flight operations and thereby maintain and improve the safety margin.

Dinges, David F.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Flight Crew Sleep in Long-Haul Aircraft Bunk Facilities: Survey Results

Modem long-haul aircraft can fly up to 16 continuous hours and provide a 24-hour, global capability. Extra (augmented) flight crew are available on long flights to allow planned rest periods, on a rotating basis, away from the flight deck in onboard crew rest facilities (2 bunks). A NASA/FAA study is under-way to examine the quantity and quality of sleep obtained in long-haul aircraft bunks and the factors that promote or interfere with that sleep. The first phase of the study involved a retrospective survey, followed by a second phase field study to collect standard polysomnographic data during inflight bunk sleep periods. A summary of the Phase I survey results are reported here. A multi-part 54-question retrospective survey was completed by 1,404 flight crew (37% return rate) at three different major US air carriers flying B747-100, 200, 400, and MD- 11 long-haul aircraft. The questions examined demographics, quantity and quality of sleep at home and in onboard bunks, factors that promote or interfere with sleep, and effects on subsequent performance and alertness. Flight crew reported a mean bunk sleep latency of 39.4 mins (SD=28.3 mins) (n=1,276) and a mean total sleep time of 2.2 hrs (SD=1.3 hrs) (n=603). (Different flight lengths could affect overall time available for sleep.) Crew rated 25 factors for their interference or promotion of bunk sleep. Figure I portrays the average ratings for each factor across all three carriers. A principal components analysis of the 25 factors revealed three areas that promoted bunk sleep: physiological (e.g., readiness for sleep), physical environment (e.g., bunk size, privacy), and personal comfort (e.g., blankets, pillows). Five areas were identified that interfered with sleep: environmental disturbance (e.g., background noise, turbulence), luminosity (e.g., lighting), personal disturbances (e.g., bathroom trips, random thoughts), environmental discomfort (e.g., low humidity, cold), and interpersonal disturbances (e.g., bunk partner).

Rosekind, Mark R.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Crew factors in flight operations 9: Effects of planned cockpit rest on crew performance and alertness in long-haul operations

This study examined the effectiveness of a planned cockpit rest period to improve alertness and performance in long-haul flight operations. The Rest Group (12 crew members) was allowed a planned 40 minute rest period during the low workload, cruise portion of the flight, while the No-Rest Group (9 crew members) had a 40 minute planned control period when they maintained usual flight activities. Measures used in the study included continuous ambulatory recordings of brain wave and eye movement activity, a reaction time/vigilance task, a wrist activity monitor, in-flight fatigue and alertness ratings, a daily log for noting sleep periods, meals, exercise, flight and duty periods, and the NASA Background Questionnaire. The Rest Group pilots slept on 93 percent of the opportunities, falling asleep in 5.6 minutes and sleeping for 25.8 minutes. This nap was associated with improved physiological alertness and performance compared to the No-Rest Group. The benefits of the nap were observed through the critical descent and landing phases of flight. The nap did not affect layover sleep or the cumulative sleep debt. The nap procedures were implemented with minimal disruption to usual flight operations and there were no reported or identified concerns regarding safety.

Rosekind, Mark R.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Flight controller alertness and performance during MOD shiftwork operations

Decreased alertness and performance associated with fatigue, sleep loss, and circadian disruption are issues faced by a diverse range of shiftwork operations. During STS operations, MOD personnel provide 24 hr. coverage of critical tasks. A joint JSC and ARC project was undertaken to examine these issues in flight controllers during MOD shiftwork operations. An initial operational test of procedures and measures was conducted during STS-53 in Dec. 1992. The study measures included a background questionnaire, a subjective daily logbook completed on a 24 hr. basis (to report sleep patterns, work periods, etc.), and an 8 minute performance and mood test battery administered at the beginning, middle, and end of each shift period. Seventeen Flight controllers representing the 3 Orbit shifts participated. The initial results clearly support further data collection during other STS missions to document baseline levels of alertness and performance during MOD shiftwork operations. These issues are especially pertinent for the night shift operations and the acute phase advance required for the transition of day shift personnel into the night for shuttle launch. Implementation and evaluation of the countermeasure strategies to maximize alertness and performance is planned. As STS missions extend to further extended duration orbiters, timelines and planning for 24 circadian disruption will remain highly relevant in the MOD environment.

Kelly, Sean M.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Alertness management in flight operations - Strategic napping

Strategic napping in two different flight operation environments is considered to illustrate its application as a fatigue countermeasure. Data obtained from commercial short-haul and long-haul operations demonstrated the utility and current practices of strategic napping. A preplanned cockpit nap acted as an acute 'safety valve' for the sleep loss, circadian disruption, and fatigue that occurs in long-haul flying.

Rosekind, Mark R.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Cockpit napping

The results of a NASA-sponsored study examining the effectiveness of a brief, preplanned cockpit rest period to improve pilot alertness and performance in nonaugmented long-haul flight operations are discussed. Four regularly scheduled trans-Pacific flight legs were studied. The shortest flight legs were about 7 h and the longest about 9.5 h, with duty periods averaging about 11 h and layovers about 25 h. Three-person B747 crews were divided randomly into two volunteer pilot groups. These crews were nonaugmented, and therefore no relief pilots were available. The rest group, consisting of four crews, was allowed a 40 min opportunity to rest during the overwater cruise portion of the flight. On a preplanned, rotating basis, individual crew members were allowed to nap. It is concluded that a preplanned cockpit nap is associated with significantly better behavioral performance and higher levels of physiological alertness and that this can be accomplished without disrupting normal flight operations or compromising safety.

Graeber, R. Curtis↗