Timing of Sleep in the Break Between Two Consecutive Night-Shifts: The Effect of Different Strategies on Daytime Sleep and Night-Time Neurobehavioural Function

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine whether the timing of sleep in the break between consecutive night-shifts affects the quantity and quality of sleep obtained during the daytime and/or neurobehavioural function and self-perceived capacity during the night-time. METHODS: Participants (n = 12, all male, aged 22.9±5.2 y) completed three randomised, counterbalanced conditions in a sleep laboratory, consisting of two consecutive 12-hour night-shifts (18:00–06:00) with 7 hours in bed in the break between shifts. The three conditions differed only in the timing of the sleep opportunities – immediate (07:00–14:00), delayed (10:00–17:00), split (07:00–10:30 and 13:30–17:00). Neurobehavioural function (attention, memory, throughput) and self-perceived capacity (sleepiness, alertness, fatigue, mood) were assessed at 2-hour intervals during the night-shifts. RESULTS: Condition did not affect total sleep time (p = 0.465), but it did affect sleep onset latency (p < 0.001; W = 0.780; large effect), wake after sleep onset (p = 0.018; W = 0.333; moderate effect) and the amount of Stage N3 sleep (p < 0.001; η(2)=0.510; small effect). Compared to the immediate and delayed sleep conditions, the split sleep condition had less wake after sleep onset and more Stage N3 sleep; and compared to the delayed condition, the split sleep condition had longer latency to sleep onset. There was no effect of condition on measures of neurobehavioural function or self-perceived capacity during the second night-shift. CONCLUSION: None of the three sleep strategies examined here – immediate, delayed or split – are clearly superior or inferior to the others in terms of the capacity to sleep during the daytime or to work at night. Therefore, those who work consecutive night-shifts should employ the strategy that best suits their personal preferences and/or circumstances.