China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Anti-fatigue Strategies for Shift Lag and Jet Lag
Published in John A. Caldwell, J. Lynn Caldwell, Fatigue in Aviation, 2016
John A. Caldwell, J. Lynn Caldwell
Which of the many scheduling tools is best? This question is impossible to answer with any degree of certainty right now since further field validation and fine-tuning is needed. However, these issues should not discourage the selection of a tool that looks appropriate, nor efforts to try it out in the operational context. Just remember, the advice offered by any particular computer algorithm is intended to be a general guide rather than something that must be followed to the letter. For our present purposes, no attempt will be made to recommend one model over another. However, an example of the sort of scheduling assistance that is now available will be drawn from the Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling Tool™ (FAST) that is currently being used in some aviation settings.
Coping with Fatigue
Published in Rhona Flin, Paul O’Connor, Margaret Crichton, Safety at the Sharp End, 2008
Rhona Flin, Paul O’Connor, Margaret Crichton
Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling Tool (FAST™). The FAST™ tool was developed by US Department of Defence laboratories. This model uses the Sleep, Activity, Fatigue and Task Effectiveness (SAFTE) algorithm to integrate information about circadian rhythms, cognitive performance recovery rates associated with wakefulness, and cognitive performance decay rates associated with sleep inertia to produce a three-process model of human cognitive performance. The SAFTE provides a measure of ‘task effectiveness’ measured on a scale from 0% to 100% effective. The SAFTE was developed for use in both military and commercial settings, with current users including the US Air Force and the US Federal Railroad Administration (Mallis et al., 2004).
Fatigue in aviation
Published in R. Key Dismukes, Human Error in Aviation, 2017
Since scheduling factors are often cited as the number one contributor to pilot fatigue, the development and implementation of more 'human centered' work routines should be considered paramount for promoting on-the-job alertness. Unfortunately, crew scheduling practices in aviation have yet to incorporate the advanced knowledge of fatigue, sleep, and circadian rhythms that has been gained over the past 20 years. Concerted efforts must be made to develop schedules that recognize (1) sleep as being essential for optimum functioning, (2) breaks as being important for preserving sustained attention, and (3) recovery periods during each work cycle as being necessary to ensure full recovery from fatiguing work conditions.4 In addition, crew schedules should include weekly rather than monthly recovery days to ensure recuperation from cumulative fatigue/sleep debt. Furthermore, scheduling practices must take into account the facts that (1) circadian factors influence both sleep and performance, (2) homeostatic factors (continuous wakefulness) are similarly important, and (3) under certain conditions these two factors can interact to create sudden and dangerous lapses in vigilance. Also, it must be recognized that training, professionalism, motivation, and increased monetary incentives will have little impact on the basic physiological nature of circadian and homeostatic determinants of operator alertness. Finally, it is important to note that flight crews are made up of individuals who are differentially affected by sleep disruptions, long duty periods, circadian rhythms, and other potentially problematic factors. Thus, 'one-size-fits-all' scheduling practices are almost certainly inadequate. New computerized scheduling tools such as the Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling Tool (FAST)70 and the System for Aircrew Fatigue Evaluation (SAFE)71 can ease the process of developing and implementing new schedules by allowing planners to better appreciate the impact of fatigue-inducing factors and the potential benefits of appropriate counter-fatigue strategies. Once validated across a wide array of aviation applications, these easy-to-use computerized scheduling tools will no doubt contribute to successful aviation alertness management.
An improved model to predict performance under mental fatigue
Published in Ergonomics, 2018
Henry T. Peng, Fethi Bouak, Wenbi Wang, Renee Chow, Oshin Vartanian
Today there are a number of bio-mathematical fatigue models available (Dawson et al. 2011; Gundel, Marsalek, and Ten Thoren 2007). Among those, one of the widely used models is Sleep, Activity, Fatigue, and Task Effectiveness (SAFTE) model developed by Hursh et al. (2004, Van Dongen 2004) and commercially available as Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling Tool (FAST Model). Currently, Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC), Toronto Research Centre is using FAST model as a base to develop a new fatigue model to help the CAF better predict the performance of its soldiers. Improvements are made to our SAFTE-based model to include task demand, pharmaceutical countermeasures, jet lag, night shift and light countermeasures that are considered as important factors in the development of bio-mathematical models of fatigue and performance (Dinges 2004; Friedl et al. 2004).