Scott Jan, Vaaler Arne E, Fasmer Ole Bernt, Morken Gunnar, Krane-Gartiser Karoline
Academic Psychiatry, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Department of Neuroscience, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Int J Bipolar Disord. 2017 Dec;5(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s40345-017-0076-6. Epub 2017 Mar 1.
Until recently, actigraphy studies in bipolar disorders focused on sleep rather than daytime activity in mania or depression, and have failed to analyse mixed episodes separately. Furthermore, even those studies that assessed activity parameters reported only mean levels rather than complexity or predictability of activity. We identified cases presenting in one of three acute phases of bipolar disorder and examined whether the application of non-linear dynamic models to the description of objectively measured activity can be used to predict case classification.
The sample comprised 34 adults who were hospitalized with an acute episode of mania (n = 16), bipolar depression (n = 12), or a mixed state (n = 6), who agreed to wear an actiwatch for a continuous period of 24 h. Mean level, variability, regularity, entropy, and predictability of activity were recorded for a defined 64-min active morning and active evening period. Discriminant function analysis was used to determine the combination of variables that best classified cases based on phase of illness.
The model identified two discriminant functions: the first was statistically significant and correlated with intra-individual fluctuation in activity and regularity of activity (sample entropy) in the active morning period; the second correlated with several measures of activity from the evening period (e.g. Fourier analysis, autocorrelation, sample entropy). A classification table generated from both functions correctly classified 79% of all cases based on phase of illness (χ = 36.21; df 4; p = 0.001). However, 42% of bipolar depression cases were misclassified as being in manic phase.
The findings should be treated with caution as this was a small-scale pilot study and we did not control for prescribed treatments, medication adherence, etc. However, the insights gained should encourage more widespread adoption of statistical approaches to the classification of cases alongside the application of more sophisticated modelling of activity patterns. The difficulty of accurately classifying cases of bipolar depression requires further research, as it is unclear whether the lower prediction rate reflects weaknesses in a model based only on actigraphy data, or if it reflects clinical reality i.e. the possibility that there may be more than one subtype of bipolar depression.
直到最近,双相情感障碍的活动记录仪研究主要关注睡眠,而非躁狂或抑郁发作时的日间活动,并且未能单独分析混合发作。此外,即使那些评估活动参数的研究也仅报告了平均水平,而非活动的复杂性或可预测性。我们确定了双相情感障碍三个急性期之一的病例,并研究了应用非线性动力学模型来描述客观测量的活动是否可用于预测病例分类。
样本包括34名因躁狂急性发作(n = 16)、双相抑郁(n = 12)或混合状态(n = 6)而住院的成年人,他们同意连续佩戴活动记录仪24小时。在确定的64分钟上午活动期和晚上活动期记录活动的平均水平、变异性、规律性、熵和可预测性。判别函数分析用于确定基于疾病阶段对病例进行最佳分类的变量组合。
该模型确定了两个判别函数:第一个具有统计学意义,与上午活动期活动的个体内波动和活动规律性(样本熵)相关;第二个与晚上活动期的多项活动测量指标相关(如傅里叶分析、自相关、样本熵)。由这两个函数生成的分类表根据疾病阶段正确分类了79%的所有病例(χ = 36.21;自由度4;p = 0.001)。然而,42%的双相抑郁病例被错误分类为躁狂期。
由于这是一项小规模的试点研究,且我们未对规定治疗、药物依从性等进行控制,因此这些发现应谨慎对待。然而,所获得的见解应鼓励更广泛地采用统计方法对病例进行分类,并同时应用更复杂的活动模式建模。准确分类双相抑郁病例存在困难,这需要进一步研究,因为尚不清楚较低的预测率是反映了仅基于活动记录仪数据的模型的弱点,还是反映了临床现实,即双相抑郁可能存在不止一种亚型的可能性。