This study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over study designed to evaluate the effectiveness and efficacy of 2 consecutive work days of nightly use of active versus sham PowerSleep devices in adults with self-imposed restricted sleep schedules. The primary analysis will be intent-to-treat with the secondary analysis as an as-treated analysis. The expected duration of the study for each participant is up to 4 weeks.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
84
Participants will wear the PowerSleep device with soft audio tones administered via the speakers during deep sleep throughout the night.
Participants wear the same PowerSleep device as with the active treatment, however no audio tones will be administered via the speakers.
Sleep Disorders Center of Alabama
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Arkansas Center for Sleep Medicine
Little Rock, Arkansas, United States
Florida Lung & Sleep Associates
Lehigh Acres, Florida, United States
NeuroTrials Research Inc.
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
Average Amount of Slow Wave Activity Delivered by the Powersleep Device With and Without Stimulation
It is hypothesized that the use of active PowerSleep over two work nights of use, as compared to the sham device over two work nights of use, will result in a significant increase (≥5%), in mean total slow-wave activity (SWA). Slow wave activity (SWA) corresponds to the EEG power in the 0.5 to 4 Hz band during non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep. SWA reflects the number and amplitude of slow-waves and determines the speed with which sleep-need dissipates.
Time frame: 4 nights
Cumulative Amount of Slow Wave Activity Delivered by the Powersleep Device With and Without Stimulation
It is hypothesized that the use of active PowerSleep over two work nights of use, as compared to the sham device over two works nights of use, will result in a significant increase (≥5%), in mean total slow-wave activity (SWA).The integral of SWA (CSWA) over a sleep session, is directly proportional to the sleep-need dissipation occurring during said sleep session. In our research, both SWA and CSWA are evaluated as relative values having as reference the average SWA and CSWA over sham sleep sessions. CSWA is the integral of SWA which is why the unit of CSWA is microvolt\^2×minute.
Time frame: 4 nights
Changes in Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT)
To evaluate the relationship between MSLT (sleep latency) and changes in SWA. This evaluated the average length of time it took a participant to fall asleep (in minutes) for each of the 4 naps in each condition, after two nights of sham and two nights of stim.
Time frame: 4 nights
Paired Associates Learning (PAL)
To measure trends of memory of 2 weeks of home use randomized with active PowerSleep (delivering audio tones) as compared to a two weeks of sham (delivering no audio tones). Participants answered completed an 80 word pair memory recall in the morning following the overnight in the sleep lab. The results listed below are the mean and standard deviation of the PowerSleep treatment week compared to the Sham treatment week. Learning was completed on the last night in the lab in each arm, with recall in the morning. PAL Differences (morning - evening responses): Difference between number correct the morning recall and the evening recall Correct Responses (evening recall): number of correct responses during the evening recall Correct Responses (morning call): number of correct responses during the morning recall, after the night in the sleep lab.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Center for Sleep and Wake Disorders
Chevy Chase, Maryland, United States
Clayton Sleep Institute
St Louis, Missouri, United States
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Time frame: 4 nights
Changes in Cognitive Testing - Verbal Fluency
To evaluate the relationship between cognitive testing changes and changes in SWA. Verbal fluency is a type of cognitive testing in which participants are required to generate as many words directly related to the instructions as they can. This task has three conditions each arm:letter fluency (F,A,S and B,H,R),category fluency (Animals, Boys names and clothing girls names) and category switching (Fruits and furniture and vegetables and musical instruments). Each trial with each condition lasts for 60 seconds. Total correct responses are calculated by counting the number of correct words generated for each condition: letter fluency, category fluency and switching Total repetition errors are calculated by counting any response that is repeated within the 60sec trial for each condition. Total set-loss errors are any response that violates any of the criterion rules of the condition (for example saying Bill instead of Beth for girls names) for each condition.
Time frame: 4 nights
Average Subjective Sleepiness Scales.
Average subjective sleepiness scales, as measured by scores on a scale of 0 to 10, PowerSleep Sham over 2 works nights of use as compared to PowerSleep Stim over 2 works nights of use. For these outcomes the 0 was the worst, 10 being the best. Sleepiness scales were completed each morning following after the 2 nights of the one condition and the 2 nights in the other condition. The values of 2 nights (mornings after) are averaged and compared to the average of the 2 nights the following week. Therefore the timeframe is 4 nights.
Time frame: 2 days following each intervention, over 9 days
Average Subjective Sleepiness Scale- Karolinska Sleepiness Scale
Average subjective sleepiness between PowerSleep Sham nights as compared to PowerSleep Stim nights on the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale 1 - very alert, 9 - very sleepy, great effort to keep awake Sleepiness scales were completed each morning following after the 2 nights of the one condition and the 2 nights in the other condition. The averages of the 2 nights (mornings after) are compared to the averages of the 2 nights (mornings after) the following week. Therefore the timeframe is 4 nights.
Time frame: 2 days following each intervention, over 9 days
Average of Subjective Sleepiness Scale- Samn Perelli
Average subjective sleepiness between PowerSleep Sham as compared to PowerSleep Stim on the Samn Perelli questionnaire 1 - fully alert, wide awake, extremely peppy and 7 - completely exhausted, unable to function effectively, ready to drop Sleepiness scales were completed each morning following after the 2 nights of the one condition and the 2 nights in the other condition. The averages of the 2 nights (mornings after) are compared to the average of the 2 nights(mornings after) the following week. Therefore the timeframe is 4 nights.
Time frame: 2 days following each intervention, over 9 days
Psychomotor Vigilance Test - Reaction Times
To measure trends of vigilance of (2 nights) of home use randomized with active PowerSleep (delivering audio tones) as compared to (2 nights) of sham (delivering no audio tones). This measured how quickly participants reacted to visual stimulus. Reaction time is the latency at which the participant reacts to a visual stimulus \> 100 ms.
Time frame: 4 nights
Psychomotor Vigilance Test - Number of Anticipation and Number of Lapses.
To measure trends of vigilance of (2 nights) of home use randomized with active PowerSleep (delivering audio tones) as compared to (2 nights) of sham (delivering no audio tones). Anticipations are the increase in errors of commission (responses without a stimulus) response time \<100ms. Lapses (errors of omission) are measured or usually defined as reaction Times ≥ 500 ms.
Time frame: 4 nights
Psychomotor Vigilance Test - Average Speed
To measure trends of vigilance of (2 nights) of home use randomized with active PowerSleep (delivering audio tones) as compared to (2 nights) of sham (delivering no audio tones). This measured the average speed with which participants respond to a visual stimulus. The average speed is 1/RT (also called reciprocal response time or response speed).
Time frame: 4 nights