Table 3.
Studies examining sleep manipulation and insulin sensitivity by methodology
| Study | No. and sex of subjects | Age, mean ± sd (yr) | BMI, mean ± sd (kg/m2) | Design | Comparator condition | Intervention | In-lab | Insulin sensitivity measurement | Effect of intervention on |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Insulin sensitivity | Other glucose parameters | |||||||||
| Donga, 2010 (78) | 5 M, 4 F | 44.6 ± 14.7 | 23.8 ± 2.4 | Randomized, 2 period, crossover | 1 × 8.5-h TIB | 1 × 4-h TIB SR | Yes | 3-h hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp | ↓ 25% | ↓gluc disposal 20%, ↑gluc production 22%, ⇆ fasting gluc, fasting ins |
| Buxton, 2010 (83) | 20 M | 26.8 ± 5.2 | 23.3 ± 3.1 | Fixed ordera | 3 × 10- h TIB BLa | 7 × 5-h TIB SRa | Yes | 3-h hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp on BL 3, SR 7 MINMOD from 3 h ivGTT (insulin modified) on BL 2, SR 6 | Clamp, ↓11%; ivGTT, ↓20% | ↓disposition index, ↓gluc tolerance. ⇆ acute ins response, gluc effectiveness, fasting gluc, fasting ins. No effect of modafinil |
| Nedeltcheva, 2009 (74) | 6 M, 5 F | 39 ± 5 | 26.5 ± 1.5 | Randomized, 2 period, crossover | 14 × 8.5-h TIB | 14 × 5.5-h TIB SR | Partial- <30 min/d outside | MINMOD from 3-h ivGTT on d 15 AUC from 3-h OGTT on d 14 (30-min sampling) | ↓18% | ↑gluc effectiveness, ↑2 h gluc, ↑gluc AUC. ⇆ fasting gluc, fasting ins, ins AUC, acute ins response, disposition index |
| Tasali, 2008 (75) | 5 M, 4 F | Range, 20–31 | Range, 19–24 | Fixed order | 2 × 8.5-h TIB BL | 3 × 8.5-h TIB INT with SWS reduction by acoustic stimuli | Yes | MINMOD from 3 h ivGTT on BL 2 and INT 3 | ↓25% | ↓disposition index 20%, ↓gluc tolerance 23% |
| Stamatakis, 2010 (76) | 9 M, 2 F | 23.2 | 24.3 ± 3.0 | Fixed order | Habitual sleep at home (mean >7-h TIB week before study) | 3 × habitual TIB INT with sleep fragmentation by acoustic stimuli on nights 2 and 3 | Yes | MINMOD from 3-h ivGTT on day prior to BL sleep and on INT 2 | ↓25% | ↓gluc effectiveness 21%, ⇆ disposition index |
| Spiegel, 1999 (73) and | 11 M | 22 ± 3.3 | 23.4 ± 1.7 | Fixed order | 6 × 12-h TIB REC | 6 × 4-h TIB SR | Partial-day release on BL 1, SR 1–4, REC 1–4 | MINMOD from 3-h ivGTT on SR 5 and REC 5 | ⇆ | ↓gluc clearance 40%, ↓gluc effectiveness 30%, ↓acute ins response 30% |
| Spiegel, 2004 (87) | HOMA-IR from 24-h sampling (10–30 min) on SR 6 and REC 6 | ↑ HOMA-IR 56%, post breakfast, ⇆ other meals | Response to identical meals showed ↑gluc and ↑ins production | |||||||
| Bosy-Westphal, 2008 (80) | 14 F | 27.5 ± 5.3 | 25.8 ± 5.8 | Fixed order | 2 × >8-h TIB BL | 1 × 7-h, 2 × 6-h, 1 × 4-h TIB SR, then 2 × >8-h TIB REC | No | HOMA-IR on BL 2, SR 4, REC 2 | ⇆ | ⇆ fasting gluc, fasting ins, gluc AUC, insulin AUC |
| Matsuda index from OGTT on BL 2, SR 4 (6 samples over 90 min) | ⇆ | |||||||||
| Schmid, 2009 (81) | 10 M | 25.3 ± 4.4 | 23.8 ± 1.6 | Randomized, 2 period, crossover | 1 × 7-h TIB | 1 × 4.5-h TIB SR | Yes | HOMA-IRb | ⇆ | ⇆ fasting gluc, fasting ins, C-peptide |
| Zielinski, 2008 (77) | 12 M, 28 F | 60.4 ± 5.3 | 25.5 ± 3.2 | Randomized, controlled, parallel group | 56 × >8.5-h TIB (CON, n = 18) | 56 × TIB ↓ by 1.5 h (INT, n = 24) | No | QUICKI | ⇆ | ⇆ gluc, ins |
| Schmid, 2011 (111) | 15 M | 27.1 ± 5.0 | 22.9 ± 1.2 | Randomized, 2 period, crossover | 2 × 8.25-h TIB | 2 × 4.25-h TIB SR | Partial-day release on d 1 | AUC 3 h (60 min sampling) response to breakfast after night 2 of condition | ⇆ fasting gluc, fasting ins, ↑peak gluc 11% + AUC, ↑peak ins 40% + AUC, ↑C-peptide AUC, ↓glucagon AUC. ⇆ during rest of day | |
| van Leeuwen, 2010 (79) | 23 M | 23.1 ± 2.5 | 23.2 ± 2.6 | Randomized, controlled, parallel group | 10 × 8-h TIB (CON, n = 8) | 2 × 8-h TIB BL, 5 × 4-h TIB SR, 3 × 8-h TIB REC (INT, n = 15) | Yes | Fasting morning sample on BL 2, SR 5, REC 2 | ⇆ gluc (but ↓ after REC cf BL), ↑ins , ↑ins:gluc ratio (returned to BL after REC) | |
M, Male; F, female; BL, baseline; SR, sleep restriction; REC, recovery; CON, control group; INT, intervention; gluc, glucose; ins, insulin; ins sens, insulin sensitivity; ivGTT, iv glucose tolerance test; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; MINMOD, minimal model analysis; QUICKI, quantitative insulin-sensitivity check index; HOMA-IR, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance; AUC, area under curve; ⇆, no change; ↑, increased; ↓, decreased; cf, compared to.
a
Then randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled ± 300 mg modafinil/d during SR.
b
4-h hypoglycemic clamp also performed, no change in gluc infusion rate, ins concentration or C-peptide levels, ↓fasting glucagon, and ↓glucagon during clamp.