Can sleep quality and wellbeing be improved by changing the indoor lighting in the homes of healthy,elderly citizens?

The study investigated the effect of bright blue-enriched versus blue-suppressed indoor light on sleep and wellbeing of healthy participants over 65 years. Twenty-nine participants in 20 private houses in a uniform settlement in Copenhagen were exposed to two light epochs of 3 weeks with blue-enriched (280 lux) and 3 weeks blue-suppressed (240 lux) indoor light or vice versa from 8 to 13 pm in a randomized cross-over design. The first light epoch was in October, the second in November and the two light epochs were separated by one week. Participants were examined at baseline and at the end of each light epoch. The experimental indoor light was well tolerated by the majority of the participants. Sleep duration was 7.44 (95% CI 7.14–7.74) hours during blue-enriched conditions and 7.31 (95% CI 7.01–7.62) hours during blue-suppressed conditions (p?=?0.289). Neither rest hours, chromatic pupillometry, nor saliva melatonin profile showed significant changes between blue-enriched and blue-suppressed epochs. Baseline Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was significantly worse in females; 7.62 (95% CI 5.13–10.0) versus 4.06 (95% CI 2.64–5.49) in males, p?=?0.009. For females, PSQI improved significantly during blue-enriched light exposure (p?=?0.007); no significant changes were found for males. The subjective grading of indoor light quality doubled from participants habitual indoor light to the bright experimental light, while it was stable between light epochs, although there were clear differences between blue-enriched and blue-suppressed electrical light conditions imposed. Even though the study was carried out in the late autumn at northern latitude, the only significant difference in Actiwatch-measured total blue light exposure was from 8 to 9 am, because contributions from blue-enriched, bright indoor light were superseded by contributions from daylight.     

Validation and Calibration of Physical Activity Monitors in Children

Objective: This study was designed to validate accelerometer-based activity monitors against energy expenditure (EE) in children; to compare monitor placement sites; to field-test the monitors; and to establish sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous threshold counts. Research Methods and Procedures: Computer Science and Applications Actigraph (CSA) and Mini-Mitter Actiwatch (MM) monitors, on the hip or lower leg, were validated and calibrated against 6-hour EE measurements by room respiration calorimetry, activity by microwave detector, and heart rate by telemetry in 26 children, 6 to 16 years old. During the 6 hours, the children performed structured activities, including resting metabolic rate (RMR), Nintendo, arts and crafts, aerobic warm-up, Tae Bo, treadmill walking and running, and games. Activity energy expenditure (AEE) computed as EE − RMR was regressed against counts to derive threshold counts. Results: The mean correlations between EE or AEE and counts were slightly higher for MM-hip (r = 0.78 ± 0.06) and MM-leg (r = 0.80 ± 0.05) than CSA-hip (r = 0.66 ± 0.08) and CSA-leg (r = 0.73 ± 0.07). CSA and MM performed similarly on the hip (inter-instrument r = 0.88) and on the lower leg (inter-instrument r = 0.89). Threshold counts for the CSA-hip were <800, <3200, <8200, and ≥8200 for sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous categories, respectively. For the MM-hip, the threshold counts were <100, <900, <2200, and ≥2200, respectively. Discussion: The validation of the CSA and MM monitors against AEE and their calibration for sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous thresholds certify these monitors as valid, useful devices for the assessment of physical activity in children.     

Deriving the reference value from the circadian motor active patterns in the “non-dementia” population,compared to the “dementia” population: What is the amount of physical activity conducive to the good circadian rhythm

Background: The circadian rhythm in older adults is commonly known to change with a decrease in physical activity. However, the association between circadian rhythm metrics and physical activity remains unclear. The objective of this study was to examine circadian activity patterns in older people with and without dementia and to determine the amount of physical activity conducive to a good circadian measurement. Method: Circadian parameters were collected from 117 older community-dwelling people (66 subjects without dementia and 52 subjects with dementia); the parameters were measured continuously using actigraphy for 7 days. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was applied to determine reference values for the circadian rhythm parameters, consisting of interdaily stability (IS), intradaily variability (IV), and relative amplitude (RA), in older subjects. Results: The ROC curve revealed reference values of 0.55 for IS, 1.10 for IV, and 0.82 for RA. In addition, as a result of the ROC curve in the moderate-to-vigorous physical Activity (MVPA) conducive to the reference value of the Non-parametric Circadian Rhythm Analysis per day, the optimal reference values were 51 minutes for IV and 55 minutes for RA. However, the IS had no classification accuracy. Conclusions: Our results demonstrated the reference values derived from the circadian parameters of older Japanese population with or without dementia. Also, we determined the MVPA conducive to a good circadian rest–active pattern. This reference value for physical activity conducive to a good circadian rhythm might be useful for developing a new index for health promotion in the older community-dwelling population.