Measuring Sleep: Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Specificity of Wrist Actigraphy Compared to Polysomnography
Measuring Sleep: Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Specificity of Wrist Actigraphy Compared to Polysomnography
复制标题
DOI：
10.5665/sleep.3142
复制
发表时间：
2013-11-01
期刊：
影响因子：
5.6
通讯作者：
Buxton, Orfeu M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marino, Miguel;Li, Yi;Buxton, Orfeu M.
目的：我们验证了体动仪检测睡眠和觉醒与多导睡眠图（PSG）。设计：体动仪和多导睡眠图同时收集在睡眠实验室入院。除了睡眠限制研究外，所有研究均涉及8.5小时的卧床时间。历元（30秒; n = 232，849）的敏感性（当PSG =睡眠时，体动记录=睡眠）、特异性（当PSG =清醒时，体动记录=清醒）和准确性（总比例正确）;还评估了睡眠发作后的觉醒量（WASO）。广义估计方程（GEE）模型包括年龄、性别、失眠症诊断和白天/夜间睡眠时间因素。设置：受控睡眠实验室条件。参与者：年轻和老年人，健康或慢性原发性失眠症（PI）患者，以及23名夜间工作者的白天睡眠。（n = 77，年龄35.0 +/- 12.5，30 F，平均夜数= 3.2）。干预措施：不适用。测量和结果：总体，灵敏度（0.965）和准确度（0.863）高，而特异性（0.329）较低;每一项仅因性别、失眠、日/夜睡眠时间而略有改变（变化幅度< 0.04）。随着年龄的增长，特异性略有降低。平均WASO/night是49.1分钟PSG相比，36.8分钟/night的腕动计（β = 0.81; CI = 0.42，1.21），无偏时WASO < 30分钟/night，高估时WASO> 30分钟/night.Conclusions：这种验证量化的优势和弱点的腕动计作为一种工具，测量睡眠在临床和人口研究。总体而言，特定参与者的准确率相对较高，对于大多数参与者来说，在80%以上。我们在多个夜晚和各种成年人中验证了这一发现，这些成年人在年轻到中年的大部分时间里，在男性和女性中，在有和没有失眠的人中，以及在77名参与者中。我们的结论是，体动仪是一个有用的和有效的手段，估计总的睡眠时间和觉醒后，在现场和工作场所的研究，在特异性有一定的局限性。
Objectives: We validated actigraphy for detecting sleep and wakefulness versus polysomnography (PSG).Design: Actigraphy and polysomnography were simultaneously collected during sleep laboratory admissions. All studies involved 8.5 h time in bed, except for sleep restriction studies. Epochs (30-sec; n = 232,849) were characterized for sensitivity (actigraphy = sleep when PSG = sleep), specificity (actigraphy = wake when PSG = wake), and accuracy (total proportion correct); the amount of wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO) was also assessed. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) model included age, gender, insomnia diagnosis, and daytime/nighttime sleep timing factors.Setting: Controlled sleep laboratory conditions.Participants: Young and older adults, healthy or chronic primary insomniac (PI) patients, and daytime sleep of 23 night-workers (n = 77, age 35.0 +/- 12.5, 30F, mean nights = 3.2).Interventions: N/A.Measurements and Results: Overall, sensitivity (0.965) and accuracy (0.863) were high, whereas specificity (0.329) was low; each was only slightly modified by gender, insomnia, day/night sleep timing (magnitude of change < 0.04). Increasing age slightly reduced specificity. Mean WASO/night was 49.1 min by PSG compared to 36.8 min/night by actigraphy (beta = 0.81; CI = 0.42, 1.21), unbiased when WASO < 30 min/night, and overestimated when WASO > 30 min/night.Conclusions: This validation quantifies strengths and weaknesses of actigraphy as a tool measuring sleep in clinical and population studies. Overall, the participant-specific accuracy is relatively high, and for most participants, above 80%. We validate this finding across multiple nights and a variety of adults across much of the young to midlife years, in both men and women, in those with and without insomnia, and in 77 participants. We conclude that actigraphy is overall a useful and valid means for estimating total sleep time and wakefulness after sleep onset in field and workplace studies, with some limitations in specificity.