ÜBERMAD

FocusReview

Naps at work may cut sleepiness, but reaction times showed no clear change

No differenceThe short version

Across 3 studies, napping made no clear difference to reaction time at the end of a shift.

A man lies napping on a sofa with his forearm across his eyes, lifting it and settling back, half-waking as he does.
3
studies pooled

The review

  1. Who took part

    This review combined 13 studies of adults aged 18 and over who worked shifts, and not all were emergency medical staff. The paper does not give the total number of people.

  2. What they did

    Nap groups had a protected chance to sleep during the shift, with 15 to 120 minutes allowed, depending on the study. The other groups had no nap. Several studies had the same people try both, on different shifts.

  3. What happened

    Sleepiness was lower after a nap at the end of a shift (2 studies), and it rose less over a shift. Reaction times showed no clear difference (3 studies), though the summary says naps improved performance. The evidence was rated very low quality, and two sleepiness results have identical ranges, so check them.

What the review found

  1. No differenceFocus

    Across 3 studies, napping made no clear difference to reaction time at the end of a shift.

    Pooled analysis of 3 studies · vs people who did not nap · the authors rated their certainty very low · ⚠ most studies had serious flaws; mixes trials with other kinds of study

  2. HelpedOther outcomes

    Across 2 studies, napping left people less sleepy at the end of a shift.

    Pooled analysis of 2 studies · vs people who did not nap · they rated themselves · the authors rated their certainty very low · ⚠ most studies had serious flaws; mixes trials with other kinds of study

How solid is this?

  • Numbers unreliable
  • Summary claims more than the results show
  • Mixes trials with other kinds of study

Source

Effects of Napping During Shift Work on Sleepiness and Performance in Emergency Medical Services Personnel and Similar Shift Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2018)

DOI: 10.1080/10903127.2017.1376136 (opens in a new tab)

More on focus

See all