Adjustable sit-stand workstations, which are designed to allow workers to sit and stand autonomously while working, were examined to identify the effects on workers' musculoskeletal discomfort, alertness and performance. Twenty-four healthy subjects participated in the study. The subjects were required to do an English transcription task for 150 min under the following conditions: 1) sitting at standard workstations (Standard), 2) sitting on a chair with the work surface elevated to standing position (High-chair) and 3) a combination of 10-min sitting and 5-min standing with the same setting as that in the high-chair condition (Sit-stand). The subjective musculoskeletal discomfort scores indicated that High-chair and Sit-stand resulted in relatively higher discomfort levels than the Standard condition. Although the ratio between low-frequency (0.04-0.15 Hz) and high-frequency (0.15-0.4 Hz) components of heart rate variability (LF/HF ratio) in Sit-stand was higher than that in other conditions, there were no significant differences in subjective sleepiness among the three conditions. As for work performance, there was a tendency to be steadily high under the Sit-stand condition compared with other conditions, but not a significant difference. This study revealed that although the use of sit-stand workstations can contribute to keeping workers' arousal level steady, it has an adverse effect in light of musculoskeletal discomfort.

We aimed to examine the effects of the daily rest period (DRP) on resting blood pressure (BP) and fatigue and determine the optimal DRP for daytime workers. Fifty-four daytime employees participated in a 1-month observational study. BP was measured thrice at the workplace. Employees underwent a pre- and post-survey to determine the usual DRP and assess subjective health outcomes. To determine the optimal DRP, DRP criteria were set as 11, 12, 13, and 14 hours. Workers with a shorter DRP had high diastolic BP and fatigue. Diastolic BP was higher in the short group than in the long group for the 14-hour DRP criteria alone. Shorter DRP was associated with high diastolic BP. We recommend a longer DRP (≥14 hours) for improving workers’ cardiovascular health.

Nighttime napping is an effective measure to prevent adverse effects due to night shift work. A characteristic of nighttime nap is that it can result in considerably deeper sleep. Several studies have shown that taking nighttime naps suppressed increasing sleepiness, decreasing alertness during the period following awaking from a nap, and prevented disturbance of circadian rhythm (“anchor sleep”). The length of daytime sleep after night shift, when combined with a nighttime nap, is shorter than that without nap. This finding might be interpreted as a beneficial effect rather than a negative feature because workers can then spend time engaged in other activities rather than sleeping. Nevertheless, the introduction of nighttime sleep break in the workplace has not been widely accepted. To promote nighttime napping strategy in the workplace, consensus building while acting on conflicting interest is essential. Recently, participatory method for improvement of working condition has expanded worldwide. A characteristic of the activity is using action checklist and group work, and heightening motivation to improvement working condition between worker and manager. Through the activities, nighttime napping strategy would be spread more in the workplaces and play a role as one of the effective tools for improving working conditions, work performance and safety in the future.

Objectives This study was conducted to determine whether extended sleep time during the weekend improves alertness and performance during the subsequent week for workers who are habitually short on sleep time. Methods Daytime employees in the manufacturing industry [38.3, standard deviation (SD) 8.1 years old, mean weekday sleep ≤6 hours] participated in a study that lasted 3 successive weeks. Participants were instructed to stay in bed for ≥8 hours between 22:00–09:00 hours on weekends during the first week as a sleep intervention condition and keep their habitual sleep–wake patterns as a habitual weekend sleep condition beginning the weekend of the second week through Thursday of the third week. Half the participants underwent the conditions in one order and the other half in the reverse. Sleep was monitored by an actigraph. A psychomotor vigilance task, subjective fatigue, and blood pressure were measured on Monday and Thursday during the afternoon each week. Results Sleep duration on weekends was approximately 2 hours longer per day during the intervention. However, sleep duration during weekdays following the intervention returned to shorter periods. Significantly shorter reaction times and a smaller number of lapses on the psychomotor vigilance task were found on Mondays after the intervention than after the habitual weekend sleep. The opposite results, however, were observed on Thursdays. Conclusions Sleep extension on weekends may be effective in improving alertness and performance during the first days in subsequent weeks among workers with short sleep times. These benefits might be maintained if sufficient sleep duration continues.

Napping is one strategy that may assist night shiftworkers to cope with sleepiness and fatigue. However, one potential disadvantage of napping is that awakening from naps is disturbed by sleep inertia, which has also been found to impair performance and/or mood, transiently. The authors examined the effects of the timing and length of a night-shift nap on sleep inertia in a laboratory setting. Twelve male university students (mean +/- SD: 21.6 +/- 2.8 yrs) participated in this 3-day experiment, during which included a simulated night shift (22:00-08:00 h) and subsequent day (11:30-17:30 h) and night sleep (00:00-07:00 h). The simulated night shift was designed to include one of five (four nap/one no-nap) conditions. The napping conditions differed by their timing and duration: 00:00-01:00 h (Early 60 min; E60), 00:00-02:00 h (Early 120 min; E120), 04:00-05:00 h (Late 60 min; L60), 04:00-06:00 h (Late 120 min; L120). Participants completed all the experimental conditions in a counterbalanced order. Rectal temperature (R(T)) was recorded throughout the simulated shift and polysomnography (PSG) was recorded during the nap period. Immediately before and after each nap, participants were required to complete a visual analogue scale (VAS) to assess sleepiness and a visual vigilance test (VVT). During the simulated night shift, a set of tasks (an English transcription task, a performance test battery, and a break) was repeated hourly, except during the periods of napping. For each nap condition, the VAS and VVT (reaction time [RT]; lapses >5 s) results were analyzed by two-way, repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) (nap [nap versus no-nap] x time point [pre-nap versus post-nap]). PSG and R(T) data were analyzed with one-way repeated-measures ANOVA. Marginally significant interactions were observed for RTs and lapses in VVT for the L60 nap condition (p = .071 and p = .070, respectively). However, those effect sizes were moderate (partial eta(2) = 0.266, 0.268, respectively). Post hoc analyses showed significantly longer RTs (p < .05) and more lapses (p < .05) following the L60 nap compared with no nap. In contrast, there was no significant difference in sleepiness between the L60, or any of the other nap conditions, and the no-nap condition. Our findings suggest the effect of sleep inertia on VVT performance was profound in the L60 condition, although no significant effects on sleepiness were self-reported by VAS. The dissociation between performance and sleepiness might reflect an unstable state where participants cannot perceive decline in their performance. The present findings are significant in terms of occupational safety; the practical implication is that great care is needed when taking a 1-h nap between 04:00 and 05:00 h on the night shift.