Movement toward a novel activity monitoring device
Movement toward a novel activity monitoring device
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11325-011-0585-y
复制
发表时间：
2012-09-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Bond, Jonathan A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Montgomery-Downs, Hawley E.;Insana, Salvatore P.;Bond, Jonathan A.
虽然多导睡眠图对于大多数睡眠障碍的诊断是必要的，但它也昂贵、耗时、侵入性并且干扰睡眠。基于现场的活动监测越来越多地用作可用于回答某些临床和研究问题的替代措施。本研究的目的是评估新型活动监测设备 (Fitbit) 相对于多导睡眠图和标准体动记录仪 (Actiwatch-64) 的可靠性和有效性。为了测试有效性，西弗吉尼亚大学睡眠研究实验室的 24 名健康成年人在标准夜间多导睡眠图期间同时佩戴 Fitbit 和体动记录仪。为了测试 Fitbit 间的可靠性，三名参与者还在家里佩戴了两台 Fitbit 设备过夜。Fitbit 显示出较高的设备内可靠性 = 96.5-99.1。 Fitbit 和活动记录仪与多导睡眠监测仪在记录的总睡眠时间和睡眠效率方面存在显着差异。 Bland-Altman 图表明 Fitbit 和 actigraph 都高估了睡眠效率和总睡眠时间。 Fitbit 和体动记录仪在所有睡眠阶段和唤醒期间准确识别睡眠的灵敏度都很高； Fitbit 和活动记录仪在准确识别唤醒方面的特异性都很差。除入睡前觉醒外，体动记录仪的特异性较高； Fitbit 在所有睡眠阶段和唤醒期间的灵敏度都较高。与标准体动记录仪相比，基于网络的 Fitbit 价格显着降低，并且具有多种便利因素，可能是正常人群可接受的活动测量工具。然而，Fitbit 具有与体动记录仪相同的特异性限制；这两种设备始终将清醒误认为是睡眠，从而高估了睡眠时间和质量。 Fitbit 的使用还需要经过特定的验证才能用于评估无序人群和/或不同年龄组。
Although polysomnography is necessary for diagnosis of most sleep disorders, it is also expensive, time-consuming, intrusive, and interferes with sleep. Field-based activity monitoring is increasingly used as an alternative measure that can be used to answer certain clinical and research questions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a novel activity monitoring device (Fitbit) compared to both polysomnography and standard actigraphy (Actiwatch-64).To test validity, simultaneous Fitbit and actigraph were worn during standard overnight polysomnography by 24 healthy adults at the West Virginia University sleep research laboratory. To test inter-Fitbit reliability, three participants also wore two of the Fitbit devices overnight at home.Fitbit showed high intradevice reliability =96.5-99.1. Fitbit and actigraph differed significantly on recorded total sleep time and sleep efficiency between each other and polysomnography. Bland-Altman plots indicated that both Fitbit and actigraph overestimated sleep efficiency and total sleep time. Sensitivity of both Fitbit and actigraphy for accurately identifying sleep was high within all sleep stages and during arousals; specificity of both Fitbit and actigraph for accurately identifying wake was poor. Specificity of actigraph was higher except for wake before sleep onset; sensitivity of Fitbit was higher in all sleep stages and during arousals.The web-based Fitbit, available at a markedly reduced price and with several convenience factors compared to standard actigraphy, may be an acceptable activity measurement instrument for use with normative populations. However, Fitbit has the same specificity limitations as actigraphy; both devices consistently misidentify wake as sleep and thus overestimate both sleep time and quality. Use of the Fitbit will also require specific validation before it can be used to assess disordered populations and or different age groups.