Bellone Giannina J, Plano Santiago A, Cardinali Daniel P, Chada Daniel Pérez, Vigo Daniel E, Golombek Diego A
Chronobiology Laboratory, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes (UNQ) Bernal, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Applied Neuroscience Laboratory, Institute for Biomedical Research (BIOMED), School of Medical Sciences Universidad Católica Argentina (UCA), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Chronobiology Laboratory, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes (UNQ) Bernal, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Applied Neuroscience Laboratory, Institute for Biomedical Research (BIOMED), School of Medical Sciences Universidad Católica Argentina (UCA), Buenos Aires, Argentina; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (CONICET), Argentina.
Sleep Sci. 2016 Oct-Dec;9(4):272-279. doi: 10.1016/j.slsci.2016.05.004. Epub 2016 Jun 20.
Sleep-related health disorders are increasing worldwide; diagnosis and treatment of such sleep diseases are commonly invasive and sometimes unpractical or expensive. Actigraphy has been recently introduced as a tool for the study of sleep and circadian disorders; however, there are several devices that claim to be useful for research and have not been thoroughly tested. This comparative study provides activity, sleep and temperature information regarding several of the most commonly used actigraphers: Micro-Mini Motion Logger; Act Trust; Misfit Flash; Fitbit Flex & Thermochron. Twenty-two healthy young subjects were assessed with five different commercial actigraphs (Micro-Mini Motionlogger Watch, Condor Act Trust, MisFit Flash and Fitbit Flex) and a temperature recorder (Thermochron), and also completed a sleep diary for a week. There were not significant differences in the analysis of rest-activity pattern between devices. Temperature rhythm comparison between the Act Trust and the Thermochron showed significant differences in rhythm percentage (<0.05) and mesor (<0.0563) but not in amplitude or acrophase. Although data accessibility and ease of use was very different for the diverse devices, there were no significant differences for sleep onset, total sleep time and sleep efficiency recordings, where applicable. In conclusion, depending on the type of study and analysis desired (as well as cost and compliance of use), we propose some relative advantages for the different actigraphy/temperature recording devices.
与睡眠相关的健康障碍在全球范围内日益增多；此类睡眠疾病的诊断和治疗通常具有侵入性，有时不实用或成本高昂。活动记录仪最近已被引入作为研究睡眠和昼夜节律紊乱的工具；然而，有几种声称对研究有用的设备尚未经过全面测试。这项比较研究提供了有关几种最常用活动记录仪的活动、睡眠和温度信息：微型运动记录仪；Act Trust；Misfit Flash；Fitbit Flex和Thermochron。22名健康的年轻受试者使用五种不同的商用活动记录仪（微型运动记录仪手表、Condor Act Trust、Misfit Flash和Fitbit Flex）和一台温度记录仪（Thermochron）进行了评估，并且还完成了一周的睡眠日记。各设备之间在静息-活动模式分析方面没有显著差异。Act Trust和Thermochron之间的温度节律比较显示，在节律百分比（<0.05）和中值（<0.0563）方面存在显著差异，但在振幅或峰相位方面没有差异。尽管不同设备的数据可获取性和易用性差异很大，但在适用的情况下，睡眠开始时间、总睡眠时间和睡眠效率记录方面没有显著差异。总之，根据所需的研究和分析类型（以及成本和使用依从性），我们提出了不同活动记录仪/温度记录设备的一些相对优势。
