TY - JOUR
T1 - Physiological markers of sleep quality
T2 - A scoping review
AU - McCarter, Stuart J.
AU - Hagen, Philip T.
AU - St. Louis, Erik K.
AU - Rieck, Thomas M.
AU - Haider, Clifton R.
AU - Holmes, David R.
AU - Morgenthaler, Timothy I.
N1 - Funding Information:
This material is based upon work supported by the Office of Naval Research under Contract No. N00014-19-C-2017 . Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2022/8
Y1 - 2022/8
N2 - Understanding the associations between adequate sleep, performance and health outcomes is vital, yet a major limitation in the design and interpretation of studies of sleep and performance is the variability of subjective and objective markers used to assess sleep quality. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate how various physiological signals recorded during sleep or wakefulness relate to objective measures of cognitive or physical performance and subjectively perceived sleep quality to inform conceptual understanding of the elusive, amorphous, and multi-dimensional construct of sleep quality. We also aimed to suggest priorities for future areas of research in sleep quality and performance. We searched six databases ultimately yielding 439 studies after duplicate removal. Sixty-five studies were selected for full review. In general, correlations between objectively measured sleep and objective performance or subjectively assessed sleep quality were weak to moderate. Slow wave sleep was moderately correlated with better performance on tasks of vigilance, motor speed, and executive function as well as better subjective sleep quality and feeling well-rested, suggesting that slow wave sleep may be important for sleep quality and optimal daytime performance. However, these findings were inconsistent across studies. Increased sleep fragmentation was associated with poorer subjective sleep quality in both polysomnographic and actigraphic studies. Studies which simultaneously assessed physiologic sleep measures, performance measures and subjective sleep perception were few, limiting the ability to evaluate correlations between subjective and objective outcomes concurrently in the same individuals. Factors influencing the relationship between sleep quality and performance include circadian variability, sleep inertia, and mismatch between sleep stages studied and outcome measures of choice. Ultimately, the determination of “quality sleep” remains largely subjective and inconsistently quantifiable by current measures. Methods evaluating sleep as a continuous measure rather than traditional sleep stages may provide an intriguing approach to future studies of sleep and performance. Future well-designed studies using novel measures of sleep or multimodal ambulatory wearables assessing the three domains of sleep and performance (objective sleep physiology, objective performance, and subjective sleep quality) are needed to better define quality sleep.
AB - Understanding the associations between adequate sleep, performance and health outcomes is vital, yet a major limitation in the design and interpretation of studies of sleep and performance is the variability of subjective and objective markers used to assess sleep quality. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate how various physiological signals recorded during sleep or wakefulness relate to objective measures of cognitive or physical performance and subjectively perceived sleep quality to inform conceptual understanding of the elusive, amorphous, and multi-dimensional construct of sleep quality. We also aimed to suggest priorities for future areas of research in sleep quality and performance. We searched six databases ultimately yielding 439 studies after duplicate removal. Sixty-five studies were selected for full review. In general, correlations between objectively measured sleep and objective performance or subjectively assessed sleep quality were weak to moderate. Slow wave sleep was moderately correlated with better performance on tasks of vigilance, motor speed, and executive function as well as better subjective sleep quality and feeling well-rested, suggesting that slow wave sleep may be important for sleep quality and optimal daytime performance. However, these findings were inconsistent across studies. Increased sleep fragmentation was associated with poorer subjective sleep quality in both polysomnographic and actigraphic studies. Studies which simultaneously assessed physiologic sleep measures, performance measures and subjective sleep perception were few, limiting the ability to evaluate correlations between subjective and objective outcomes concurrently in the same individuals. Factors influencing the relationship between sleep quality and performance include circadian variability, sleep inertia, and mismatch between sleep stages studied and outcome measures of choice. Ultimately, the determination of “quality sleep” remains largely subjective and inconsistently quantifiable by current measures. Methods evaluating sleep as a continuous measure rather than traditional sleep stages may provide an intriguing approach to future studies of sleep and performance. Future well-designed studies using novel measures of sleep or multimodal ambulatory wearables assessing the three domains of sleep and performance (objective sleep physiology, objective performance, and subjective sleep quality) are needed to better define quality sleep.
KW - Performance
KW - Physiologic
KW - Quality
KW - Sleep
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85132754589&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85132754589&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.smrv.2022.101657
DO - 10.1016/j.smrv.2022.101657
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35753151
AN - SCOPUS:85132754589
SN - 1087-0792
VL - 64
JO - Sleep Medicine Reviews
JF - Sleep Medicine Reviews
M1 - 101657
ER -