No abstract

Future researchers should aim to conduct sleep interventions among different athlete populations, compare results, and further establish guidelines and intervention tools for athletes to address their specific sleep demands and disturbances.

Electronic media use is prevalent among adolescent populations, as is the frequency of sleeplessness. One mechanism proposed for technology affecting adolescents' sleep is the alerting effects from bright screens. Two explanations are provided. First, screens emit significant amounts of short-wavelength light (i.e. blue), which produces acute alertness and alters sleep timing. Second, later chronotypes are hypothesised to be hypersensitive to evening light. This study analysed the pre-sleep alertness (GO/NOGO task speed, accuracy; subjective sleepiness), sleep (sleep diary, polysomnography), and morning functioning of 16 healthy adolescents (M = 17.4 ± 1.9 yrs, 56% f) who used a bright tablet screen (80 lux), dim screen (1 lux) and a filtered short-wavelength screen (f.lux; 50 lux) for 1 hr before their usual bedtime in a within-subjects protocol. Chronotype was analysed as a continuous between-subjects factor; however, no significant interactions occurred. Significant effects occurred between bright and dim screens for GO/NOGO speed and accuracy. However, the magnitude of these differences was small (e.g. GO/NOGO speed = 23 ms, accuracy = 13%), suggesting minimal clinical significance. No significant effects were found for sleep onset latency, slow-rolling eye movements, or the number of SWS and REM minutes in the first two sleep cycles. Future independent studies are needed to test short (1 hr) vs longer (>2 hrs) screen usage to provide evidence for safe-to-harmful levels of screenlight exposure before adolescents' usual bedtime.

Mobile phone use is often blamed for adolescent sleeping difficulties in the popular and scientific literature, with correlations observed between adolescents' mobile phone use and their bedtime. We aimed to obtain experimental evidence to support these causal claims. A within-subjects experiment (baseline, intervention) was conducted in adolescents' homes, to determine the effect of restricting adolescents' pre-bed mobile phone use on school night sleep habits. Following a baseline week, adolescents were given individualized phone stop times, 1 hour before bed for one school week. An online sleep diary was used to monitor bedtime, lights out time, sleep latency and total sleep. Sixty three adolescents (age range 14-18, M = 16.3, SD = 0.93yrs; 17%male) provided data. During one week of phone restriction, adolescents stopped using their phones earlier (80 min, p < .001), turned their lights off earlier (17 min, p = .01), and slept longer (21 min, p = .01). Participant recruitment was low (26%), indicating many adolescents lack motivation to negotiate changes to their evening phone use. Overall, there are potential benefits of restricted mobile phone use during the pre-sleep period, yet, future research is needed to identify non-technological interventions to increase adherence to phone restriction (e.g., motivational interviewing) or otherwise decrease pre-sleep arousal (e.g., cognitive strategies).

Australian & New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, https://www.anzctr.org.au, ACTRN12614000308695.