Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Fatigue at sea:from old to new Horizons
Wessel van Leeuwen, Stockholm University,
Sweden
Zhiwei Zhao, Dalian Maritime University,
China
Jørgen Riis Jepsen, University of Southern
Denmark
[email protected], Stress Research Institute
The HORIZON project
• 90 healthy experienced bridge and engineer watch keepers
• Employed through a manning agency
• 1 day of introduction and training
• 1 week voyage (North Sea & English Channel)
• Either 4/8 or 6/6
• On site for full 7 days in accommodation
• Caffeine is regulated and no alcohol
Measures included:
• Sleepiness ratings
• Stress ratings
• Wake, work, sleep diaries
• Electroencephalograpy
(EEG)
• Reaction time (PVT task)
• Navigational performance
• Debriefing interviews
Karolinska Sleepiness Scale1 extremely alert2 very alert3 alert4 rather alert5 neither alert nor sleepy 6 some signs of sleepiness7 sleepy, no effort to stay awake8 sleepy some effort to stay awake9 very sleepy, great effort to stay awake, fighting sleep
Key questions
• How sleepy were participants whilst on watch?
• Did participants fall asleep on watch?
• How much sleep did participants get off watch?
• Was there performance affected?
Sleepiness higher in 6/6
Sleep on watch more frequent in 6/6
Overtime work increases sleepiness
4/8 6/6
Sleep off watch
Conclusions
• More sleep on watch, less sleep off watch in 6/6 compared to 4/8
• Most severe sleepiness reached at the end of night watches
• Unexpectedly high amounts of participants falling asleep on watch
• But no effects on navigational performance
Naturalistic performance unaffected, but….
An illustration of sleep on watch
Clocktime
20:29
An illustration of sleep on watch
15
16
Martha
fatigue predicting tool – based on
the results of project Horizon
[email protected], Stress Research Institute
17
12
-31-9
6 1
2:0
0
12
-31-9
6 1
8:0
0
1-1
-97
0:0
0
1-1
-97
6:0
0
1-1
-97
12:0
0
1-1
-97
18:0
0
1-2
-97
0:0
0
1-2
-97
6:0
0
1-2
-97
12:0
0
1-2
-97
18:0
0
1-3
-97
0:0
0
1-3
-97
6:0
0
1-3
-97
12:0
0
1-3
-97
18:0
0
1-4
-97
0:0
0
1-4
-97
6:0
0
1-4
-97
12:0
0
1-4
-97
18:0
0
1-5
-97
0:0
0
1-5
-97
6:0
0
1-5
-97
12:0
0
1-5
-97
18:0
0
1-6
-97
0:0
0
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16S C U Alertness
Ale
rtn
ess
Regulation of alertness
18
Historical development
• 1995: three process model of alertness regulation (TPMA) published in the literature
• 2004: sleep wake predictor (SWP): the first implementation publically available
• 2011: MARTHA: SWP adjusted for seafaring based on HORIZON results
Regulation of alertness
19
MARTHA: The New Horizon
[email protected], Stress Research Institute
A Research Project sponsored by
the TK Foundation
20
• Enhance FRM by investigating long term aspects of fatigue (web surveys, diaries, actiwatches)
• Investigate cultural differences in interpretation of regulatory frameworks on hours of work and rest (interviews with managers)
• Evaluate effectiveness of FRM in the context of shipping operations (experimental shipboard)
Project aims
21
The main partners
Partner Main Interest
Southampton Solent University (SSU)
Project managementCo-ordinate shipboard data collection (Europe)
Stress Research Institute, Stockholm (SRI)
Research designFatigue measures Web surveys
University of Southern Denmark: (USD)
Company interviewsQuestionnaires and interviews
Dalian Maritime University (DMU)
Chinese seafarers
University of Southampton (SMMI)
Performance measuresPhD supervision
InterManager (IMGR) Shipping CompaniesDissemination
22
The main partnersThe main partners
Kick off meeting on 2nd July 2013
23
Time schedule MARTHA
• Research design– Sep 2013 – Dec 2013
• Interview and diary studies– Jan 2014 – Jun 2014
• Analyses interview and diary studies– Jul 2014 – Dec 2014
• Shipboard studies– Jan 2015 – Dec 2015
• Analyses shipboard studies– Apr 2015 – Dec 2015
24
• Why?– Not much known about long term fatigue, especially not
in the context at sea– Optimize FRM for seafarer-context – to be used for aim
3
• How? – web surveys– diaries – Actiwatches
• When?– first half of 2014
Project aim 1: enhance FRM
25
• Why?– How do organisational practices affect seafarer fatigue? – Differences between Europe and China?
• How? – Interview with managers and seafarers– Compare Europe with China legislation interpreted
differently? different FRMS strategies might be needed
• When?– first half of 2014
Project aim 2: Investigate cultural differences
26
Cultural differences can be disastrous
Obeying TCAS or ATC?
27
• Why?– Is it effective to train seafarers on sleep and fatigue and
the use of the MARTHA software?
• How? – Compare a FRM group with a control group is the
FRM group indeed coping better with fatigue?– Again using Chinese and European groups
• When?– Jan-Dec 2015
Project aim 3: Investigate effectiveness of FRMS
Thank you for your attention
