Fuller Kate L, Juliff Laura, Gore Christopher J, Peiffer Jeremiah J, Halson Shona L
Department of Physiology, Australian Institute of Sport, Australia.
School of Psychology and Exercise Science, Murdoch University, Australia.
J Sci Med Sport. 2017 Aug;20(8):756-760. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2016.11.021. Epub 2017 Jan 24.
Actical actigraphy is commonly used to monitor athlete sleep. The proprietary software, called Actiware, processes data with three different sleep-wake thresholds (Low, Medium or High), but there is no standardisation regarding their use. The purpose of this study was to examine validity and bias of the sleep-wake thresholds for processing Actical sleep data in team sport athletes.
Validation study comparing actigraph against accepted gold standard polysomnography (PSG).
Sixty seven nights of sleep were recorded simultaneously with polysomnography and Actical devices. Individual night data was compared across five sleep measures for each sleep-wake threshold using Actiware software. Accuracy of each sleep-wake threshold compared with PSG was evaluated from mean bias with 95% confidence limits, Pearson moment-product correlation and associated standard error of estimate.
The Medium threshold generated the smallest mean bias compared with polysomnography for total sleep time (8.5min), sleep efficiency (1.8%) and wake after sleep onset (-4.1min); whereas the Low threshold had the smallest bias (7.5min) for wake bouts. Bias in sleep onset latency was the same across thresholds (-9.5min). The standard error of the estimate was similar across all thresholds; total sleep time ∼25min, sleep efficiency ∼4.5%, wake after sleep onset ∼21min, and wake bouts ∼8 counts.
Sleep parameters measured by the Actical device are greatly influenced by the sleep-wake threshold applied. In the present study the Medium threshold produced the smallest bias for most parameters compared with PSG. Given the magnitude of measurement variability, confidence limits should be employed when interpreting changes in sleep parameters.
实际活动记录仪常用于监测运动员睡眠。名为Actiware的专有软件使用三种不同的睡眠-觉醒阈值(低、中或高)处理数据,但在其使用方面没有标准化。本研究的目的是检验在团队运动运动员中处理Actical睡眠数据的睡眠-觉醒阈值的有效性和偏差。
将活动记录仪与公认的金标准多导睡眠图(PSG)进行比较的验证研究。
使用多导睡眠图和Actical设备同时记录67个夜晚的睡眠情况。使用Actiware软件,针对每个睡眠-觉醒阈值,在五项睡眠指标上比较个体夜晚的数据。通过95%置信区间的平均偏差、皮尔逊积矩相关系数以及相关的估计标准误差,评估每个睡眠-觉醒阈值与PSG相比的准确性。
与多导睡眠图相比,中等阈值在总睡眠时间(8.5分钟)、睡眠效率(1.8%)和睡眠开始后的觉醒时间(-4.1分钟)方面产生的平均偏差最小;而低阈值在觉醒次数方面的偏差最小(7.5分钟)。睡眠开始潜伏期的偏差在各个阈值之间相同(-9.5分钟)。所有阈值的估计标准误差相似;总睡眠时间约为25分钟,睡眠效率约为4.5%,睡眠开始后的觉醒时间约为21分钟,觉醒次数约为8次。
Actical设备测量的睡眠参数受所应用的睡眠-觉醒阈值影响很大。在本研究中,与PSG相比,中等阈值在大多数参数上产生的偏差最小。鉴于测量变异性的大小,在解释睡眠参数变化时应采用置信区间。