Ear-EEG for sleep assessment: a comparison with actigraphy and PSG
Ear-EEG for sleep assessment: a comparison with actigraphy and PSG
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11325-020-02248-1
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-21
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Kidmose, Preben
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Tabar, Yousef Rezaei;Mikkelsen, Kaare B.;Kidmose, Preben
目的评估三种不同电极配置的耳EEG设置的自动睡眠分期，并与同时进行的多导睡眠图和腕戴式活动记录仪记录进行比较。方法对单耳、单耳伴同侧乳突、对耳电极配置和体动仪数据进行自动睡眠分期。多导睡眠图数据被手动评分并用作金标准。自动睡眠分期测试了来自20名健康受试者的80个整晚记录。确定所有耳-EEG设置和活动记录仪的评分性能和睡眠指标。结果单耳、同侧乳突单耳和对耳三种体位的睡眠分级结果分别为Kappa值0.36、0.63和0.72。对于乳突电极单耳和对耳设置，睡眠指标的性能（就平均绝对误差而言）优于当前研究中的体动记录仪估计的睡眠指标，也优于当前最先进的体动记录仪研究。结论无论是2个睡眠阶段还是5个睡眠阶段，从单耳到同侧乳突单耳，以及从同侧乳突单耳到交叉耳，分类的准确性和Kappa值均有显著提高。在睡眠指标方面，结果更不均匀，但总体而言，体动记录仪和单耳伴同侧乳突配置优于单耳配置;交叉耳配置始终优于体动记录仪和单耳配置。
Purpose To assess automatic sleep staging of three ear-EEG setups with different electrode configurations and compare performance with concurrent polysomnography and wrist-worn actigraphy recordings. Methods Automatic sleep staging was performed for single-ear, single-ear with ipsilateral mastoid, and cross-ear electrode configurations, and for actigraphy data. The polysomnography data were manually scored and used as the gold standard. The automatic sleep staging was tested on 80 full-night recordings from 20 healthy subjects. The scoring performance and sleep metrics were determined for all ear-EEG setups and the actigraphy device. Results The single-ear, the single-ear with ipsilateral mastoid setup, and the cross-ear setup performed five class sleep staging with kappa values 0.36, 0.63, and 0.72, respectively. For the single-ear with mastoid electrode and the cross-ear setup, the performance of the sleep metrics, in terms of mean absolute error, was better than the sleep metrics estimated from the actigraphy device in the current study, and also better than current state-of-the-art actigraphy studies. Conclusion A statistically significant improvement in both accuracy and kappa was observed from single-ear to single-ear with ipsilateral mastoid, and from single-ear with ipsilateral mastoid to cross-ear configurations for both two and five-sleep stage classification. In terms of sleep metrics, the results were more heterogeneous, but in general, actigraphy and single-ear with ipsilateral mastoid configuration were better than the single-ear configuration; and the cross-ear configuration was consistently better than both the actigraphy device and the single-ear configuration.