Chronotype

Abstract: In summary, although actigraphy is not as accurate as PSG for determining some sleep measurements, studies are in general agreement that actigraphy, with its ability to record continuously for long time periods, is more reliable than sleep logs which rely on the patients' recall of how many times they woke up or how long they slept during the night and is more reliable than observations which only capture short time periods Actigraphy can provide information obtainable in no other practical way It can also have a role in the medical care of patients with sleep disorders However, it should not be held to the same expectations as polysomnography Actigraphy is one-dimensional, whereas polysomnography comprises at least 3 distinct types of data (EEG, EOG, EMG), which jointly determine whether a person is asleep or awake It is therefore doubtful whether actigraphic data will ever be informationally equivalent to the PSG, although progress on hardware and data processing software is continuously being made Although the 1995 practice parameters paper determined that actigraphy was not appropriate for the diagnosis of sleep disorders, more recent studies suggest that for some disorders, actigraphy may be more practical than PSG While actigraphy is still not appropriate for the diagnosis of sleep disordered breathing or of periodic limb movements in sleep, it is highly appropriate for examining the sleep variability (ie, night-to-night variability) in patients with insomnia Actigraphy is also appropriate for the assessment of and stability of treatment effects of anything from hypnotic drugs to light treatment to CPAP, particularly if assessments are done before and after the start of treatment A recent independent review of the actigraphy literature by Sadeh and Acebo reached many of these same conclusions Some of the research studies failed to find relationships between sleep measures and health-related symptoms The interpretation of these data is also not clear-cut Is it that the actigraph is not reliable enough to the access the relationship between sleep changes and quality of life measures, or, is it that, in fact, there is no relationship between sleep in that population and quality of life measures? Other studies of sleep disordered breathing, where actigraphy was not used and was not an outcome measure also failed to find any relationship with quality of life Is it then the actigraph that is not reliable or that the associations just do not exist? The one area where actigraphy can be used for clinical diagnosis is in the evaluation of circadian rhythm disorders Actigraphy has been shown to be very good for identifying rhythms Results of actigraphic recordings correlate well with measurements of melatonin and of core body temperature rhythms Activity records also show sleep disturbance when sleep is attempted at an unfavorable phase of the circadian cycle Actigraphy therefore would be particularly good for aiding in the diagnosis of delayed or advanced sleep phase syndrome, non-24-hour-sleep syndrome and in the evaluation of sleep disturbances in shift workers It must be remembered, however, that overt rest-activity rhythms are susceptible to various masking effects, so they may not always show the underlying rhythm of the endogenous circadian pacemaker In conclusion, the latest set of research articles suggest that in the clinical setting, actigraphy is reliable for evaluating sleep patterns in patients with insomnia, for studying the effect of treatments designed to improve sleep, in the diagnosis of circadian rhythm disorders (including shift work), and in evaluating sleep in individuals who are less likely to tolerate PSG, such as infants and demented elderly While actigraphy has been used in research studies for many years, up to now, methodological issues had not been systematically addressed in clinical research and practice Those issues have now been addressed and actigraphy may now be reaching the maturity needed for application in the clinical arena

Abstract: Human behavior shows large interindividual variation in temporal organization. Extreme "larks" wake up when extreme "owls" fall asleep. These chronotypes are attributed to differences in the circadian clock, and in animals, the genetic basis of similar phenotypic differences is well established. To better understand the genetic basis of temporal organization in humans, the authors developed a questionnaire to document individual sleep times, self-reported light exposure, and self-assessed chronotype, considering work and free days separately. This report summarizes the results of 500 questionnaires completed inapilotstudy.Individualsleeptimesshowlargedifferencesbetweenworkand freedays,exceptforextremeearlytypes.Duringtheworkweek,latechronotypes

Abstract: Humans show large differences in the preferred timing of their sleep and activity. This so-called "chronotype" is largely regulated by the circadian clock. Both genetic variations in clock genes and environmental influences contribute to the distribution of chronotypes in a given population, ranging from extreme early types to extreme late types with the majority falling between these extremes. Social (e.g., school and work) schedules interfere considerably with individual sleep preferences in the majority of the population. Late chronotypes show the largest differences in sleep timing between work and free days leading to a considerable sleep debt on work days, for which they compensate on free days. The discrepancy between work and free days, between social and biological time, can be described as 'social jetlag.' Here, we explore how sleep quality and psychological wellbeing are associated with individual chronotype and/or social jetlag. A total of 501 volunteers filled out the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire (MCTQ) as well as additional questionnaires on: (i) sleep quality (SF-A), (ii) current psychological wellbeing (Basler Befindlichkeitsbogen), (iii) retrospective psychological wellbeing over the past week (POMS), and (iv) consumption of stimulants (e.g., caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol). Associations of chronotype, wellbeing, and stimulant consumption are strongest in teenagers and young adults up to age 25 yrs. The most striking correlation exists between chronotype and smoking, which is significantly higher in late chronotypes of all ages (except for those in retirement). We show these correlations are most probably a consequence of social jetlag, i.e., the discrepancies between social and biological timing rather than a simple association to different chronotypes. Our results strongly suggest that work (and school) schedules should be adapted to chronotype whenever possible.