SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Berg MJ, Signal TL, Gander PH. Int. J. Aerosp. Psychol. 2019; 29(3-4): 74-85.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/24721840.2019.1621177

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether on ultra-long range (ULR) flights, perceived workload is an independent predictor of cabin crew fatigue at top-of-descent (TOD) and if so, to what degree it is associated with cabin crew fatigue relative to sleep-related factors.

BACKGROUND: Current ULR scheduling for cabin crew is predominantly based on flight crew data. However, cabin crew workload is very different in nature to that of flight crew.

METHOD: Fifty-five cabin crew wore an actigraph and completed a sleep/duty diary to monitor sleep during a ULR trip. At TOD, crewmembers completed a 5-min Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT), rated their sleepiness (Karolinska Sleepiness Scale) and fatigue (Samn-Perelli Crew Status Check), and after landing their workload (NASA Task Load Index).

RESULTS: When workload was perceived as higher, crewmembers felt more sleepy and fatigued and had more PVT lapses at TOD. The effect of workload on sleepiness was larger (Cohen's ƒ2 =.27) than the duration of wakefulness (Cohen's ƒ2 =.14), but the effect of workload on fatigue (Cohen's ƒ2 =.17) was smaller than the duration of wakefulness (Cohen's ƒ2 =.24). Lapses were not associated with sleep history, whereas workload had a small effect (Cohen's ƒ2 =.14).

CONCLUSION: Workload as a fatigue factor for cabin crew warrants ongoing monitoring. This can be achieved by including a workload question in fatigue reports as an essential component in Fatigue Risk Management Systems.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print