Performance of seven consumer sleep-tracking devices compared with polysomnography.
Performance of seven consumer sleep-tracking devices compared with polysomnography.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/sleep/zsaa291
复制
发表时间：
2021-05-14
期刊：
影响因子：
5.6
通讯作者：
Markwald RR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chinoy ED;Cuellar JA;Huwa KE;Jameson JT;Watson CH;Bessman SC;Hirsch DA;Cooper AD;Drummond SPA;Markwald RR
消费者睡眠追踪设备被广泛使用，技术上也越来越先进，这引起了研究人员和临床医生的强烈兴趣，他们可能会将其用作标准活动记录仪的替代品。因此，我们测试了许多最新的消费者睡眠跟踪设备的性能，以及活动描记仪，与黄金标准的睡眠评估技术，多导睡眠描记仪（PSG）。共有34名健康年轻人（22名女性，28.1±3.9岁，平均±SD）在睡眠实验室连续三晚（包括睡眠中断）接受PSG测试，同时使用活动仪（Philips呼吸器Actiwatch 2）和一组消费者睡眠跟踪设备。总共测试了四款可穿戴设备（Fatigue Science readadiband、Fitbit Alta HR、Garmin Fenix 5S、Garmin Vivosmart 3）和三款非穿戴设备（EarlySense Live、ResMed S+、SleepScore Max）。睡眠/觉醒总结和逐时期一致性测量与PSG进行比较。大多数设备（Fatigue Science readadiband、Fitbit Alta HR、EarlySense Live、ResMed S+、SleepScore Max）在睡眠/觉醒性能指标上的表现与活动记录仪一样好，甚至更好，而Garmin设备的表现更差。总体而言，每个epoch的敏感性很高（均≥0.93），特异性为中低（0.18-0.54），睡眠阶段比较好坏不一，并且在睡眠较差/中断的夜晚，设备往往表现较差。消费者睡眠跟踪设备在检测睡眠方面表现出了很高的性能，大多数设备在检测清醒方面的表现与活动记录仪相当（甚至更好）。设备睡眠阶段评估不一致。研究结果表明，许多较新的睡眠跟踪设备在跟踪睡眠和清醒方面表现出很好的性能。设备应该在不同的人群和环境中进行测试，以进一步检查其更广泛的有效性和效用。
Consumer sleep-tracking devices are widely used and becoming more technologically advanced, creating strong interest from researchers and clinicians for their possible use as alternatives to standard actigraphy. We, therefore, tested the performance of many of the latest consumer sleep-tracking devices, alongside actigraphy, versus the gold-standard sleep assessment technique, polysomnography (PSG). In total, 34 healthy young adults (22 women; 28.1 ± 3.9 years, mean ± SD) were tested on three consecutive nights (including a disrupted sleep condition) in a sleep laboratory with PSG, along with actigraphy (Philips Respironics Actiwatch 2) and a subset of consumer sleep-tracking devices. Altogether, four wearable (Fatigue Science Readiband, Fitbit Alta HR, Garmin Fenix 5S, Garmin Vivosmart 3) and three nonwearable (EarlySense Live, ResMed S+, SleepScore Max) devices were tested. Sleep/wake summary and epoch-by-epoch agreement measures were compared with PSG. Most devices (Fatigue Science Readiband, Fitbit Alta HR, EarlySense Live, ResMed S+, SleepScore Max) performed as well as or better than actigraphy on sleep/wake performance measures, while the Garmin devices performed worse. Overall, epoch-by-epoch sensitivity was high (all ≥0.93), specificity was low-to-medium (0.18–0.54), sleep stage comparisons were mixed, and devices tended to perform worse on nights with poorer/disrupted sleep. Consumer sleep-tracking devices exhibited high performance in detecting sleep, and most performed equivalent to (or better than) actigraphy in detecting wake. Device sleep stage assessments were inconsistent. Findings indicate that many newer sleep-tracking devices demonstrate promising performance for tracking sleep and wake. Devices should be tested in different populations and settings to further examine their wider validity and utility.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
De Zambotti, Massimiliano;Cellini, Nicola;Baker, Fiona C.
通讯作者：
Baker, Fiona C.
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
de Zambotti, Massimiliano;Goldstone, Aimee;Baker, Fiona C.
通讯作者：
Baker, Fiona C.
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Belenky, G;Wesensten, NJ;Balkin, TJ
通讯作者：
Balkin, TJ
影响因子：
5.6
作者：
Colvonen PJ;DeYoung PN;Bosompra NA;Owens RL
通讯作者：
Owens RL
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Goel N;Rao H;Durmer JS;Dinges DF
通讯作者：
Dinges DF