O078 A Comparison of Subjective Sleepiness and Subjective driving Performance between People Vulnerable Versus Resistant to Driving Impairment following Extended Wakefulness.

K Nguyen, C Dunbar, A Guyett, K Bickley, P Nguyen, H Scott, A Reynolds, M Hughes, R Adams, L Lack, P Catcheside, J Cori, M Howard, C Anderson, D Stevens, N Lovato, A Vakulin
{"title":"O078 A Comparison of Subjective Sleepiness and Subjective driving Performance between People Vulnerable Versus Resistant to Driving Impairment following Extended Wakefulness.","authors":"K Nguyen, C Dunbar, A Guyett, K Bickley, P Nguyen, H Scott, A Reynolds, M Hughes, R Adams, L Lack, P Catcheside, J Cori, M Howard, C Anderson, D Stevens, N Lovato, A Vakulin","doi":"10.1093/sleepadvances/zpad035.078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction Subjective sleepiness and driving performance are generally associated but show inter-individual variability. Specifically, some people are more vulnerable, while others are more resistant to driving impairment during extended wakefulness. We examined the relationship between subjective sleepiness and driving performance in groups resistant versus vulnerable to driving impairment during extended wakefulness. Methods Thirty-two adults (female=18, mean age=33.0yrs, SD=14.6) completed five 60-minute driving simulator assessments across 29 hours of extended wakefulness. Perceived sleepiness (Karolinska sleepiness scale, KSS) and driving performance (nine-point Likert scale) were assessed at 10-minute intervals while driving. Through cluster analysis, participants were categorised as vulnerable (n=16) or resistant (n=16) using steering deviation and crash data. Correlations, stepwise regressions, and ROC curves were used to identify predictors of driving impairment. Results Perceived sleepiness and driving impairment increased across the drives during wakefulness and within drives, regardless of grouping (p<0.001). The exception was the drive at 25-hours into wakefulness, where the vulnerable group showed higher perceived driving impairment within the drive (p=0.001). Pre-drive KSS, total sleep time, age and gender were not significant predictors of crashes at drives undertaken at 1-hour, 7-hours, 13-hours, or 25-hours, but were significant at 19-hours into wakefulness, together explaining 44% of the variance in crashes. Discussion Self-reports are sensitive to driving impairment but not differential vulnerability to performance decrements during extended wakefulness. However, the findings support that both groups can perceive their sleepiness and ideally employ appropriate countermeasures (e.g., stop driving, nap, caffeine). Future studies should target more objective predictors of vulnerable versus resistant groups.","PeriodicalId":21861,"journal":{"name":"SLEEP Advances","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SLEEP Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sleepadvances/zpad035.078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Subjective sleepiness and driving performance are generally associated but show inter-individual variability. Specifically, some people are more vulnerable, while others are more resistant to driving impairment during extended wakefulness. We examined the relationship between subjective sleepiness and driving performance in groups resistant versus vulnerable to driving impairment during extended wakefulness. Methods Thirty-two adults (female=18, mean age=33.0yrs, SD=14.6) completed five 60-minute driving simulator assessments across 29 hours of extended wakefulness. Perceived sleepiness (Karolinska sleepiness scale, KSS) and driving performance (nine-point Likert scale) were assessed at 10-minute intervals while driving. Through cluster analysis, participants were categorised as vulnerable (n=16) or resistant (n=16) using steering deviation and crash data. Correlations, stepwise regressions, and ROC curves were used to identify predictors of driving impairment. Results Perceived sleepiness and driving impairment increased across the drives during wakefulness and within drives, regardless of grouping (p<0.001). The exception was the drive at 25-hours into wakefulness, where the vulnerable group showed higher perceived driving impairment within the drive (p=0.001). Pre-drive KSS, total sleep time, age and gender were not significant predictors of crashes at drives undertaken at 1-hour, 7-hours, 13-hours, or 25-hours, but were significant at 19-hours into wakefulness, together explaining 44% of the variance in crashes. Discussion Self-reports are sensitive to driving impairment but not differential vulnerability to performance decrements during extended wakefulness. However, the findings support that both groups can perceive their sleepiness and ideally employ appropriate countermeasures (e.g., stop driving, nap, caffeine). Future studies should target more objective predictors of vulnerable versus resistant groups.
[078]长时间清醒后易受伤害与抵抗性驾驶损伤者主观嗜睡与主观驾驶表现的比较。
主观嗜睡与驾驶表现普遍相关,但存在个体差异。具体来说,有些人更容易受到伤害,而另一些人在长时间清醒时更能抵抗驾驶障碍。我们研究了在长时间清醒状态下抵抗和易受驾驶障碍影响的组中,主观嗜睡和驾驶表现之间的关系。方法32名成人(女性18岁,平均年龄33.0岁,SD=14.6)在29小时的延长清醒状态下完成5次60分钟的驾驶模拟器评估。在驾驶过程中,每隔10分钟评估一次感知困倦(卡罗林斯卡困倦量表,KSS)和驾驶表现(李克特九分量表)。通过聚类分析,使用转向偏差和碰撞数据将参与者分类为脆弱(n=16)或抵抗(n=16)。使用相关性、逐步回归和ROC曲线来确定驾驶障碍的预测因子。结果:无论分组如何,在清醒状态和驾驶过程中,感知到的困倦和驾驶障碍在驾驶过程中都有所增加(p<0.001)。例外是在清醒25小时的驾驶中,弱势群体在驾驶过程中表现出更高的感知驾驶障碍(p=0.001)。开车前的KSS、总睡眠时间、年龄和性别在开车1小时、7小时、13小时或25小时时并不是撞车事故的显著预测因子,但在清醒后的19小时时则是显著的,它们共同解释了撞车事故的44%方差。自我报告对驾驶障碍敏感,但对长时间清醒状态下性能下降的差异脆弱性不敏感。然而,研究结果表明,两组人都能意识到自己的困倦,并采取适当的对策(例如,停止开车、小睡、咖啡因)。未来的研究应该针对更客观的易感人群和耐药人群的预测指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信