Optimization of shift work: physiological contributions

Abstract

Healthy subjects (n= 62) with different circadian phase positions worked up to six weeks in different shift systems. Rotation speed was experimentally varied. On shift days all subjects worked in the Institute but spent their leisure time as usual. In order to minimize bias through masking effects, ‘control days’ were interpolated (twice a week) into the shift periods. On these control days subjects remained on bedrest for 24 hours under constant conditions. Results were as follows: (i) The earlier the circadian phase position the poorer the adaptation to night-shifts. In particular, morning types were not able to adapt even to permanent night-shifts. (ii) Evening types were able to adjust their circadian systems to a slowly rotating shift system (rotation speed seven days) and a 25 h-sliding system though they failed to do so with more quickly rotating systems. Whereas indifferent subjects were not able to adjust to even the slowly rotating system. (iii) When stable phase shifts occurred in response to altered working hours they always amounted to about one hour per day if the working hours were not coherent with the usual environmental zeitgebers. It is concluded that, on physiological criteria, very slow rotating shift systems or permanent night-shifts seem to be acceptable for evening types, but not for morning types who may require special health care in these conditions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 40 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.