Objectives: We investigated the management of travel fatigue and jet lag in athlete populations by evaluating studies that have applied non-pharmacological interventions (exercise, sleep, light and nutrition), and pharmacological interventions (melatonin, sedatives, stimulants, melatonin analogues, glucocorticoids and antihistamines) following long-haul transmeridian travel-based, or laboratory-based circadian system phase-shifts. Design: Systematic review Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and non-RCTs including experimental studies and observational studies, exploring interventions to manage travel fatigue and jet lag involving actual travel-based or laboratory-based phase-shifts. Studies included participants who were athletes, except for interventions rendering no athlete studies, then the search was expanded to include studies on healthy populations. Data sources: Electronic searches in PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and SPORTDiscus from inception to March 2019. We assessed included articles for risk of bias, methodological quality, level of evidence and quality of evidence. Results: Twenty-two articles were included: 8 non-RCTs and 14 RCTs. No relevant travel fatigue papers were found. For jet lag, only 12 athlete-specific studies were available (six non-RCTs, six RCTs). In total (athletes and healthy populations), 11 non-pharmacological studies (participants 600; intervention group 290; four non-RCTs, seven RCTs) and 11 pharmacological studies (participants 1202; intervention group 870; four non-RCTs, seven RCTs) were included. For non-pharmacological interventions, seven studies across interventions related to actual travel and four to simulated travel. For pharmacological interventions, eight studies were based on actual travel and three on simulated travel. Conclusions: We found no literature pertaining to the management of travel fatigue. Evidence for the successful management of jet lag in athletes was of low quality. More field-based studies specifically on athlete populations are required with a multifaceted approach, better design and implementation to draw valid conclusions. PROSPERO registration number The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42019126852).

Falls-related hospitalization and injury rates are steadily increasing globally due to a growth in the aging population, and the associated health problems that increase risk of falls. One such associated health problem is sleep disturbances and disorders. Recent cohort studies have shown that subjectively reported poor quality sleep is associated with an increased risk of falls. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common sleep disorder characterized by the repetitive reductions, or cessation, of airflow. Some studies have shown that OSA impairs posture/balance and gait with nocturnal hypoxemia the likely main cause. Emerging evidence suggests that treating OSA by continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) can improve gait, but no studies to date have examined the effect of CPAP on posture/balance. The overall control of balance relies on a complex interaction between several physiological functions including vestibular, muscle, visual, and cognitive functions. We postulate that OSA impacts balance by affecting these different systems to various degrees, with the nocturnal hypoxic burden likely playing an important role. Importantly, these impairments in balance/posture and possible falls risk may be alleviated by OSA treatment. Larger mechanistic studies are needed to properly elucidate how OSA affects falls risk and future large-scale randomized control trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of OSA treatment in reducing the risk of falls.

Statistical learning (SL) studies have shown that participants are able to extract regularities in input they are exposed to without any instruction to do so. This and other findings, such as the fact that participants are often unable to verbalize their acquired knowledge, suggest that SL can occur implicitly or incidentally. Interestingly, several studies using the related paradigms of artificial grammar learning and serial response time tasks have shown that explicit instructions can aid learning under certain conditions. Within the SL literature, however, very few studies have contrasted incidental and intentional learning conditions. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of having prior knowledge of the statistical regularities in the input when undertaking a task of visual sequential SL. Specifically, we compared the degree of SL exhibited by participants who were informed (intentional group) versus those who were uninformed (incidental group) about the presence of embedded triplets within a familiarization stream. Somewhat surprisingly, our results revealed that there were no statistically significant differences (and only a small effect size) in the amount of SL exhibited between the intentional versus the incidental groups. We discuss the ways in which this result can be interpreted and suggest that short presentation times for stimuli in the familiarization stream in our study may have limited the opportunity for explicit learning. This suggestion is in line with recent research revealing a statistically significant difference (and a large effect size) between incidental versus intentional groups using a very similar visual sequential SL task, but with longer presentation times. Finally, we outline a number of directions for future research.

Hypnotic use in obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is contraindicated due to safety concerns. Recent studies indicate that single-night hypnotic use worsens hypoxaemia in some and reduces OSA severity in others depending on differences in pathophysiology. However, longer clinical trial data are lacking. This study aimed to determine the effects of 1 month of zopiclone on OSA severity, sleepiness and alertness in patients with low–moderate respiratory arousal thresholds without major overnight hypoxaemia.69 participants completed a physiology screening night with an epiglottic catheter to quantify arousal threshold. 30 eligible patients (apnoea–hypopnoea index (AHI) 22±11 events·h⁻¹) then completed standard in-laboratory polysomnography (baseline) and returned for two additional overnight sleep studies (nights 1 and 30) after receiving either nightly zopiclone (7.5 mg) or placebo during a 1-month, double-blind, randomised, parallel trial (ANZCTRidentifier ANZCTRN12613001106729).The change in AHI from baseline to night 30 was not different between zopicloneversusplacebo groups (−5.9±10.2versus−2.4±5.5 events·h⁻¹; p=0.24). Similarly, hypoxaemia, next-day sleepiness and driving simulator performance were not different.1 month of zopiclone does not worsen OSA severity, sleepiness or alertness in selected patients without major overnight hypoxaemia. As the first study to assess the effect of a hypnotic on OSA severity and sleepiness beyond single-night studies, these findings provide important safety data and insight into OSA pathophysiology.