多通道和单通道腕部设备与多导睡眠图对比测量儿童和青少年睡眠。

Comparison of multichannel and single-channel wrist-based devices with polysomnography to measure sleep in children and adolescents.

机构信息

Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina.

Department of Pediatrics, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina.

出版信息

J Clin Sleep Med. 2021 Apr 1;17(4):645-652. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.8980.

DOI:10.5664/jcsm.8980

PMID:33174529

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8020711/

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To compare sleep parameters produced by the Fitbit Charge 3 (Fitbit) and Actigraph GT9X accelerometer (Actigraph) to polysomnography in children and adolescents.

METHODS

Participants (n = 56, ages 9.2 ± 3.3 years) wore a Fitbit and an Actigraph on their nondominant wrist concurrently with polysomnography during an overnight observation at a children's sleep laboratory. Total sleep time, sleep efficiency, wake after sleep onset, sleep onset, and sleep offset were extracted from the Fitabase and Actilife software packages, respectively, with the Sadeh algorithm. Bland-Altman plots were used to assess the agreement between wearable devices and polysomnography.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine percent of participants were diagnosed with OSA. Compared with polysomnography, the Fitbit and the Actigraph underestimated total sleep time by 6.1 minutes (absolute mean bias [AMB] = 27.7 minutes) and 31.5 minutes (AMB = 38.2 minutes), respectively. The Fitbit overestimated sleep efficiency by 3.0% (AMB = 6.3%), and the Actigraph underestimated sleep efficiency by 12.9% (AMB = 13.2%). The Fitbit overestimated wake after sleep onset by 18.8 minutes (AMB = 23.9 minutes), and the Actigraph overestimated wake after sleep onset by 56.1 minutes (AMB = 54.7 minutes). In addition, the Fitbit and the Actigraph underestimated sleep onset by 1.2 minutes (AMB = 13.9 minutes) and 10.2 minutes (AMB = 18.1 minutes), respectively. Finally, the Fitbit and the Actigraph overestimated sleep offset by 6.0 minutes (AMB = 12.0 minutes) and 10.5 minutes (AMB = 12.6 minutes). Linear regression indicated significant trends, with the Fitbit underestimating wake after sleep onset and sleep efficiency at higher values.

CONCLUSIONS

The Fitbit provided comparable and in some instances better sleep estimates with polysomnography compared to the Actigraph. Findings support the use of multichannel devices to measure sleep in children and adolescents. Additional studies are needed in healthy children over several nights and in free-living settings.

摘要

研究目的

比较 Fitbit Charge 3（Fitbit）和 Actigraph GT9X 加速度计（Actigraph）与多导睡眠图在儿童和青少年中的睡眠参数。

方法

参与者（n=56，年龄 9.2±3.3 岁）在儿童睡眠实验室过夜观察期间，在非优势手腕上同时佩戴 Fitbit 和 Actigraph，并同时进行多导睡眠图检查。分别从 Fitabase 和 Actilife 软件包中使用 Sadeh 算法提取总睡眠时间、睡眠效率、睡眠起始后清醒时间、睡眠起始时间和睡眠结束时间。Bland-Altman 图用于评估可穿戴设备与多导睡眠图之间的一致性。

结果

79%的参与者被诊断为 OSA。与多导睡眠图相比，Fitbit 和 Actigraph 分别低估了总睡眠时间 6.1 分钟（绝对平均偏差[AMB]为 27.7 分钟）和 31.5 分钟（AMB 为 38.2 分钟）。Fitbit 高估了睡眠效率 3.0%（AMB 为 6.3%），Actigraph 则低估了睡眠效率 12.9%（AMB 为 13.2%）。Fitbit 高估了睡眠起始后清醒时间 18.8 分钟（AMB 为 23.9 分钟），Actigraph 高估了睡眠起始后清醒时间 56.1 分钟（AMB 为 54.7 分钟）。此外，Fitbit 和 Actigraph 分别低估了睡眠起始时间 1.2 分钟（AMB 为 13.9 分钟）和 10.2 分钟（AMB 为 18.1 分钟），并高估了睡眠结束时间 6.0 分钟（AMB 为 12.0 分钟）和 10.5 分钟（AMB 为 12.6 分钟）。线性回归表明存在显著趋势，Fitbit 在较高值时低估了睡眠起始后清醒时间和睡眠效率。