Cargando…

Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography

This study determined if using alternative sleep onset (SO) definitions impacted accelerometer-derived sleep estimates compared with polysomnography (PSG). Nineteen participants (48%F) completed a 48 h visit in a home simulation laboratory. Sleep characteristics were calculated from the second night...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chase, John D., Busa, Michael A., Staudenmayer, John W., Sirard, John R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9269695/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35808535
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22135041
_version_ 1784744283826290688
author Chase, John D.
Busa, Michael A.
Staudenmayer, John W.
Sirard, John R.
author_facet Chase, John D.
Busa, Michael A.
Staudenmayer, John W.
Sirard, John R.
author_sort Chase, John D.
collection PubMed
description This study determined if using alternative sleep onset (SO) definitions impacted accelerometer-derived sleep estimates compared with polysomnography (PSG). Nineteen participants (48%F) completed a 48 h visit in a home simulation laboratory. Sleep characteristics were calculated from the second night by PSG and a wrist-worn ActiGraph GT3X+ (AG). Criterion sleep measures included PSG-derived Total Sleep Time (TST), Sleep Onset Latency (SOL), Wake After Sleep Onset (WASO), Sleep Efficiency (SE), and Efficiency Once Asleep (SE_ASLEEP). Analogous variables were derived from temporally aligned AG data using the Cole–Kripke algorithm. For PSG, SO was defined as the first score of ‘sleep’. For AG, SO was defined three ways: 1-, 5-, and 10-consecutive minutes of ‘sleep’. Agreement statistics and linear mixed effects regression models were used to analyze ‘Device’ and ‘Sleep Onset Rule’ main effects and interactions. Sleep–wake agreement and sensitivity for all AG methods were high (89.0–89.5% and 97.2%, respectively); specificity was low (23.6–25.1%). There were no significant interactions or main effects of ‘Sleep Onset Rule’ for any variable. The AG underestimated SOL (19.7 min) and WASO (6.5 min), and overestimated TST (26.2 min), SE (6.5%), and SE_ASLEEP (1.9%). Future research should focus on developing sleep–wake detection algorithms and incorporating biometric signals (e.g., heart rate).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9269695
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92696952022-07-09 Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography Chase, John D. Busa, Michael A. Staudenmayer, John W. Sirard, John R. Sensors (Basel) Article This study determined if using alternative sleep onset (SO) definitions impacted accelerometer-derived sleep estimates compared with polysomnography (PSG). Nineteen participants (48%F) completed a 48 h visit in a home simulation laboratory. Sleep characteristics were calculated from the second night by PSG and a wrist-worn ActiGraph GT3X+ (AG). Criterion sleep measures included PSG-derived Total Sleep Time (TST), Sleep Onset Latency (SOL), Wake After Sleep Onset (WASO), Sleep Efficiency (SE), and Efficiency Once Asleep (SE_ASLEEP). Analogous variables were derived from temporally aligned AG data using the Cole–Kripke algorithm. For PSG, SO was defined as the first score of ‘sleep’. For AG, SO was defined three ways: 1-, 5-, and 10-consecutive minutes of ‘sleep’. Agreement statistics and linear mixed effects regression models were used to analyze ‘Device’ and ‘Sleep Onset Rule’ main effects and interactions. Sleep–wake agreement and sensitivity for all AG methods were high (89.0–89.5% and 97.2%, respectively); specificity was low (23.6–25.1%). There were no significant interactions or main effects of ‘Sleep Onset Rule’ for any variable. The AG underestimated SOL (19.7 min) and WASO (6.5 min), and overestimated TST (26.2 min), SE (6.5%), and SE_ASLEEP (1.9%). Future research should focus on developing sleep–wake detection algorithms and incorporating biometric signals (e.g., heart rate). MDPI 2022-07-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9269695/ /pubmed/35808535 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22135041 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Chase, John D.
Busa, Michael A.
Staudenmayer, John W.
Sirard, John R.
Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography
title Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography
title_full Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography
title_fullStr Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography
title_full_unstemmed Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography
title_short Sleep Measurement Using Wrist-Worn Accelerometer Data Compared with Polysomnography
title_sort sleep measurement using wrist-worn accelerometer data compared with polysomnography
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9269695/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35808535
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22135041
work_keys_str_mv AT chasejohnd sleepmeasurementusingwristwornaccelerometerdatacomparedwithpolysomnography
AT busamichaela sleepmeasurementusingwristwornaccelerometerdatacomparedwithpolysomnography
AT staudenmayerjohnw sleepmeasurementusingwristwornaccelerometerdatacomparedwithpolysomnography
AT sirardjohnr sleepmeasurementusingwristwornaccelerometerdatacomparedwithpolysomnography