Alexandre Sasseville

Blue blocker glasses impede the capacity of bright light to suppress melatonin production

Abstract:  Blocking morning light exposure with dark goggles can contribute to the adjustment to night work but these glasses are incompatible with driving. Recently, it was discovered that the biological clock is most sensitive to short wavelengths (blue light). Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that cutting the blue portion of the light spectrum with orange lens glasses (blue blockers) would prevent the light‐induced melatonin suppression, a test broadly used as an indirect assessment of the circadian clock sensitivity. Fourteen normal subjects were exposed at night to a 60 min bright light pulse (1300 lx behind filters) between 01:00 and 02:00 hr while wearing orange lens glasses (experimental condition) or grey lens glasses (control condition). The amount of salivary melatonin change observed during the light pulse was compared with a melatonin baseline obtained the night before. Although both glasses transmitted the same illuminance (1300 lx) but at an irradiance 25% higher for the orange lens (408 μW/cm2) compared with the grey lens (327 μW/cm2), a non‐significant increase of 6% (95% CI, −20% to 9%) was observed with the orange lens whereas a significant (P < 0.05) reduction of 46% (95% CI, 35–57%) was observed with the grey lens. Blue blockers represent an elegant means to prevent the light‐induced melatonin suppression. Further studies are needed to show that these glasses, which are suitable for driving, could facilitate adaptation to night work.

Evidence of a Biological Effect of Light Therapy on the Retina of Patients with Seasonal Affective Disorder

BACKGROUND Retinal sensitivity anomalies have been reported in patients affected by seasonal affective disorder (SAD). We used the electroretinogram (ERG) to assess seasonal change in retinal function in patients with SAD and healthy participants, as well as in patients following 4 weeks of light therapy. METHODS ERG assessments were obtained in 22 SAD patients (2 men, 20 women, mean age 31 +/- 9 years) in the fall/winter season before and after 2 and 4 weeks of light therapy and in summertime. Matched healthy participants (2 men, 14 women; mean age 29 +/- 8 years) were evaluated once in the fall/winter and once in summer. The 29-item Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Seasonal Affective Disorder version was administered. Standard ERG parameters were derived from the photopic and scotopic luminance response functions. Salivary melatonin concentration during ERG was assessed in both groups but during fall/winter assessments only. RESULTS A significantly lower cone ERG maximal amplitude and lower rod sensitivity was found in SAD patients before light therapy compared with healthy participants. Following 4 weeks of light therapy, a normalization of cone and rod ERG function occurred. ERG parameters in the summer and melatonin concentrations in fall/winter were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS Depressed patients with SAD demonstrate ERG changes in the winter compared with healthy comparison subjects with lower rod retinal sensitivity and lower cone maximal amplitude. These changes normalized following 4 weeks of light therapy and during the summer, suggesting that ERG changes are state markers for SAD.

Wearing Blue-Blockers in the Morning Could Improve Sleep of Workers on a Permanent Night Schedule: A Pilot Study

Night shiftworkers often complain of disturbed sleep during the day. This could be partly caused by morning sunlight exposure during the commute home, which tends to maintain the circadian clock on a daytime rhythm. The circadian clock is most sensitive to the blue portion of the visible spectrum, so our aim was to determine if blocking short wavelengths of light below 540 nm could improve daytime sleep quality and nighttime vigilance of night shiftworkers. Eight permanent night shiftworkers (32–56 yrs of age) of Quebec Citys Canada Post distribution center were evaluated during summertime, and twenty others (24–55 yrs of age) during fall and winter. Timing, efficacy, and fragmentation of daytime sleep were analyzed over four weeks by a wrist activity monitor, and subjective vigilance was additionally assessed at the end of the night shift in the fall–winter group. The first two weeks served as baseline and the remaining two as experimental weeks when workers had to wear blue-blockers glasses, either just before leaving the workplace at the end of their shift (summer group) or 2 h before the end of the night shift (fall–winter group). They all had to wear the glasses when outside during the day until 16:00 h. When wearing the glasses, workers slept, on average ±SD, 32±29 and 34±60 more min/day, increased their sleep efficacy by 1.95±2.17% and 4.56±6.1%, and lowered their sleep fragmentation by 1.74±1.36% and 4.22±9.16% in the summer and fall–winter group, respectively. Subjective vigilance also generally improved on Fridays in the fall–winter group. Blue-blockers seem to improve daytime sleep of permanent night-shift workers.

Using blue-green light at night and blue-blockers during the day to improves adaptation to night work: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND Bright light at night paired with darkness during the day seem to facilitate adaptation to night work. Considering the biological clock sensitive to short wavelengths, we investigated the possibility of adaptation in shift workers exposed to blue-green light at night, combined with using blue-blockers during the day. METHODS Four sawmill shift workers were evaluated during two weeks of night shifts (control and experimental) and one week of day shifts. Throughout the experimental week, ambient light (approximately 130 lx) was supplemented with blue-green light (200 lx) from 00:00 h to: 05:00 h on Monday and Tuesday, 06:00 h on Wednesday and 07:00 h on Thursday. Blue-blockers had to be worn outside from the end of the night shift until 16:00 h. For circadian assessment, salivary melatonin profiles were obtained between 00:00 h and 08:00 h, before and after 4 experimental night shifts. Sleep was continuously monitored with actigraphy and subjective vigilance was measured at the beginning, the middle and the end of each night and day shifts. The error percentage in wood board classification was used as an index of performance. RESULTS Through experimental week, melatonin profiles of 3 participants have shifted by at least 2 hours. Improvements were observed in sleep parameters and subjective vigilance from the third night (Wednesday) as performance increased on the fourth night (Thursday) from 5.14% to 1.36% of errors (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS Strategic exposure to short wavelengths at night, and/or daytime use of blue-blocker glasses, seemed to improve sleep, vigilance and performance.

Day and night shift schedules are associated with lower sleep quality in Evening-types

Eveningness has been suggested as a facilitating factor in adaptation to shift work, with several studies reporting evening chronotypes (E-types) as better sleepers when on night shifts. Conversely, eveningness has been associated with more sleep complaints during day shifts. However, sleep during day shifts has received limited attention in previous studies assessing chronotypes in shift workers. Environmental light exposure has also been reported to differ between chronotypes in day workers. Activity is also known to provide temporal input to the circadian clock. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare objective sleep, light exposure and activity levels between chronotypes, both during the night and day shifts. Thirty-nine patrol police patrol officers working on a fast rotating shift schedule (mean age ± SD: 28.9 ± 3.2 yrs; 28 males) participated in this study. All subjects completed the Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ). Sleep and activity were monitored with actigraphy (Actiwatch-L; Mini-Mitter/Respironics, Bend, OR) for four consecutive night shifts and four consecutive day shifts (night work schedule: 00:00 h–07:00 h; day work schedule: 07:00 h–15:00 h). Sleep and activity parameters were calculated with Actiware software. MEQ scores ranged from 26 to 56; no subject was categorized as Morning-type. E-types (n = 13) showed significantly lower sleep efficiency, longer snooze time and spent more time awake after sleep onset than Intermediate-types (I-types, n = 26) for both the night and day shifts. E-types also exhibited shorter and more numerous sleep bouts. Furthermore, when napping was taken into account, E-types had shorter total sleep duration than I-types during the day shifts. E-types were more active during the first hours of their night shift when compared to I-types. Also, all participants spent more time active and had higher amount of activity per minute during day shifts when compared to night shifts. No difference was found regarding light exposure between chronotypes. In conclusion, sleep parameters revealed poorer sleep quality in E-types for both the night and day shifts. These differences could not be explained by sleep opportunity, light exposure or activity levels. This study challenges the notion that E-types adapt better to night shifts. Further studies must verify whether E-types exhibit lower sleep quality than Morning-types.