Cited by 54Sleep and Work-Related FatigueCircadian rhythm and melatoninHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

Impact of layover length on sleep, subjective fatigue levels, and sustained attention of long-haul airline pilots

Open access
Roach, Gregory D., Petrilli, Renée M. A., Dawson, Drew, Lamond, Nicole·2012·Chronobiology International

Abstract

Long-haul airline pilots often experience elevated levels of fatigue due to extended work hours and circadian misalignment of sleep and wake periods. During long-haul trips, pilots are typically given 1-3 d off between flights (i.e., layover) to recover from, and prepare for, duty. Anecdotally, some pilots prefer long layovers because it maximizes the time available for recovery and preparation, but others prefer short layovers because it minimizes both the length of the trip, and the degree to which the body clock changes from "home time" to the layover time zone. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of layover length on the sleep, subjective fatigue levels, and capacity to sustain attention of long-haul pilots. Participants were 19 male pilots (10 Captains, 9 First Officers) working for an international airline. Data were collected during an 11- or 12-d international trip. The trips involved (i) 4 d at home prior to the trip; (ii) an eastward flight of 13.5 h across seven time zones; (iii) a layover of either 39 h (i.e., short, n = 9) or 62 h (i.e., long, n = 10); (iv) a return westward flight of 14.3 h across seven time zones; and (v) 4 d off at home after the trip. Sleep was recorded using a self-report sleep diary and wrist activity monitor; subjective fatigue level was measured using the Samn-Perelli Fatigue Checklist; and sustained attention was assessed using the psychomotor vigilance task for a personal digital assistant (PalmPVT). Mixed-model regression analyses were used to determine the effects of layover length (short, long) on the amount of sleep that pilots obtained during the trip, and on the pilots' subjective fatigue levels and capacity to sustain attention. There was no main effect of layover length on ground-based sleep or in-flight sleep, but pilots who had a short layover at the midpoint of their trip had higher subjective fatigue levels and poorer sustained attention than pilots who had a long layover. The results of this study indicate that a short layover during a long-haul trip does not substantially disrupt pilots' sleep, but it may result in elevated levels of fatigue during and after the trip. If short layovers are used, pilots should have a minimum of 4 d off to recover prior to their next long-haul trip.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/07420528.2012.675222

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sleep disorders screening in addition to circadian approaches and scheduled napping has shown effectiveness in improving safety.

    “To address these concerns, sleep disorders screening in addition to circadian approaches and scheduled napping have shown effectiveness in improving safety.189–197”

    From Sleep, Health, and Society (2017) · cites this paper as [196]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roach, G. D., Petrilli, R. M. A., Dawson, D., & Lamond, N.
Affiliations
  • Central Queensland University (AU)
  • University of South Australia (AU)
  • Royal Adelaide Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Roach, Gregory D.
Venue
Chronobiology International
Published
2012-05-23
Volume
29
Issue
5
Pages
580-586
ISSN
  • 0742-0528 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-6073
OpenAlex
W2048769434
Cited by
54
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Chronobiology International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Acquire (CQUniversity) (submittedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Australian Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
subjective fatigue, sustained attention, sleep, circadian misalignment, time zone crossing, jet lag, recovery time, psychomotor vigilance task, aviation human factors, sleep diary
MeSH terms
Adult, Aircraft, Attention, Fatigue, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Sleep, Sleep Deprivation, Time Factors, Wakefulness, Work Schedule Tolerance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review