Individual Variation Exists Within the Psychological Response to Hypoxic Bed Rest: A Retrospective Analysis

Individual variation is of interest to Space Agency’s, which cannot be explored with astronauts due to anonymity. We retrospectively analysed data collected throughout three projects (LunHab: 10-day male, PlanHab: 21-day male, and FemHab: 10-day female) to elucidate the potentially masked individual variation in the psychological responses to bed rest. The Profile of Mood State (POMS) and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) – instruments used to asses psychological state – and Lake Louise Mountain Sickness (LLMS) scores were collected prior to, following and throughout three interventions: 1: normoxic bed rest 2: hypoxic bed rest and 3: hypoxic ambulatory confinement. Total Mood Disturbance (TMD) was calculated from the POMS results, positive affect (PA), and negative affect (NA) from PANAS. The three instruments were included in a latent class mixed model. TMD, NA, and LLMS were included in a four-class model, with each class representing a specific type of response (Class 1: descending, Class 2: flat, Class 3: somewhat flat, Class 4: ascending). Responses for PA were assigned to only two classes (Classes 1 and 2). 54.55% or 24 participants were included in Class 2 (TMD, NA, and LLMS), where the responses did not change and neither hypoxia or activity level had a significant effect on emotional state. The remaining participants were allotted to Class 1, 3, or 4, where hypoxia was a significant covariate, while activity (bed rest) was significant only for class 3. For PA, 84.09% or 37 participants were assigned to class 2 indicating a significant effect of hypoxia on the participants responses with no effect of physical activity. Class 1 participants (n = 7) were not affected by hypoxia, however, physical activity improved their PA. Participants undergoing confinement, hypoxia and bed rest do not exhibit a uniform emotional response and may be categorised into 2–4 distinct classes. These results indicate significant individual emotional responses, that may be masked and underreported by traditional statistical approaches like means ± SD. The emotional state of our participants is a complex construct likely influenced by past experiences and different coping mechanisms which allowed some to adapt to the experimental environment more readily.