Validity and sensitivity of a brief psychomotor vigilance test (PVT-B) to total and partial sleep deprivation

Abstract

The Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT) objectively assesses fatigue-related changes in alertness associated with sleep loss, extended wakefulness, circadian misalignment, and time on task. The standard 10-min PVT is often considered impractical in applied contexts. To address this limitation, we developed a modified brief 3-min version of the PVT (PVT-B). The PVT-B was validated in controlled laboratory studies with 74 healthy subjects (34 female, aged 22–45 years) that participated either in a total sleep deprivation (TSD) study involving 33 hours awake (N=31 subjects) or in a partial sleep deprivation (PSD) protocol involving 5 consecutive nights of 4 hours time in bed (N=43 subjects). PVT and PVT-B were performed regularly during wakefulness. Effect sizes of 5 key PVT outcomes were larger for TSD than PSD and larger for PVT than for PVT-B for all outcomes. Effect size was largest for response speed (reciprocal response time) for both the PVT-B and the PVT in both TSD and PSD. According to Cohen's criteria, effect sizes for the PVT-B were still large (TSD) or medium to large (PSD, except for fastest 10% RT). Compared to the 70% decrease in test duration the 22.7% (range 6.9%-67.8%) average decrease in effect size was deemed an acceptable trade-off between duration and sensitivity. Overall, PVT-B performance had faster response times, more false starts and fewer lapses than PVT performance (all p<0.01). After reducing the lapse threshold from 500 ms to 355 ms for PVT-B, mixed model ANOVAs indicated no differential sensitivity to sleep loss between PVT-B and PVT for all outcome variables (all P>0.15) but the fastest 10% response times during PSD (P<0.001), and effect sizes increased from 1.38 to 1.49 (TSD) and 0.65 to 0.76 (PSD), respectively. In conclusion, PVT-B tracked standard 10-min PVT performance throughout both TSD and PSD, and yielded medium to large effect sizes. PVT-B may be a useful tool for assessing behavioral alertness in settings where the duration of the 10-min PVT is considered impractical, although further validation in applied settings is needed.

Mars 520-d mission simulation reveals protracted crew hypokinesis and alterations of sleep duration and timing

“…He also had the majority of PVT-B facial videos displaying sleepiness and the most frequent ratings of difficulty performing the PVT-B (SI Appendix, SI Text). PVT-B performance is highly sensitive to acute and chronic sleep loss and is devoid of a learning curve (4,9). The performance of crewmember f was consistent with his experiencing chronic partial sleep deprivation throughout the mission.…”

Validation of sleep-2-Peak: A smartphone application that can detect fatigue-related changes in reaction times during sleep deprivation

“…However, the PVT is available and validated on only a very limited number of devices, including the original PVT-192 and a few computer-based versions. This RT test is designed to measure alertness and is sensitive to sleep deprivation, extended wakefulness, and circadian misalignment (Balkin et al, 2004;Basner, Mollicone, & Dinges, 2011;Basner & Rubinstein, 2011;Loh, Lamond, Dorrian, Roach, & Dawson, 2004;Thorne et al, 2005).…”

Adverse Effects of Daylight Saving Time on Adolescents' Sleep and Vigilance

“…20,31 Vigilant attention is measured by quantifying the response time to a visual stimuli displaying randomly every 2 to 10 sec during a 3-to 10-min period. 31,32 The PVT does not require extensive training, can be quickly learned, and has the advantage of not being memorized after repeated use. 32,33 A computerized version of the 3-min PVT (version 2.0.5.9, Pulsar Informatics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) was used, with a random stimulus interval of 2-5 seconds.…”

“…31,32 The PVT does not require extensive training, can be quickly learned, and has the advantage of not being memorized after repeated use. 32,33 A computerized version of the 3-min PVT (version 2.0.5.9, Pulsar Informatics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) was used, with a random stimulus interval of 2-5 seconds. Students were tested on a laptop under the supervision of the research assistant in a quiet room.…”

“…Students were instructed to observe a red rectangular box on the screen for 3 min and press the spacebar on the keyboard each time a yellow counter appeared on the monitor. 32 Their vigilant attention was measured based on the response time in milliseconds (ms) during each session. The mean reaction time, number of lapses (response time ≥ 355 ms), mean reciprocal response time, and mean slowest 10% response time were recorded for each participant during each session.…”