The Appleton Institute for Behavioural Science, CQUniversity, Adelaide, SA 5043, Australia.
Human Exercise and Training Laboratory, CQUniversity, Rockhampton, QLD 4700, Australia.
Biosensors (Basel). 2021 Jun 8;11(6):185. doi: 10.3390/bios11060185.
The aims of this study were to: (1) compare actigraphy (ACTICAL) and a commercially available sleep wearable (i.e., WHOOP) under two functionalities (i.e., sleep auto-detection (WHOOP-AUTO) and manual adjustment of sleep (WHOOP-MANUAL)) for two-stage categorisation of sleep (sleep or wake) against polysomnography, and; (2) compare WHOOP-AUTO and WHOOP-MANUAL for four-stage categorisation of sleep (wake, light sleep, slow wave sleep (SWS), or rapid eye movement sleep (REM)) against polysomnography. Six healthy adults (male: = 3; female: = 3; age: 23.0 ± 2.2 yr) participated in the nine-night protocol. Fifty-four sleeps assessed by ACTICAL, WHOOP-AUTO and WHOOP-MANUAL were compared to polysomnography using difference testing, Bland-Altman comparisons, and 30-s epoch-by-epoch comparisons. Compared to polysomnography, ACTICAL overestimated total sleep time (37.6 min) and underestimated wake (-37.6 min); WHOOP-AUTO underestimated SWS (-15.5 min); and WHOOP-MANUAL underestimated wake (-16.7 min). For ACTICAL, sensitivity for sleep, specificity for wake and overall agreement were 98%, 60% and 89%, respectively. For WHOOP-AUTO, sensitivity for sleep, wake, and agreement for two-stage and four-stage categorisation of sleep were 90%, 60%, 86% and 63%, respectively. For WHOOP-MANUAL, sensitivity for sleep, wake, and agreement for two-stage and four-stage categorisation of sleep were 97%, 45%, 90% and 62%, respectively. WHOOP-AUTO and WHOOP-MANUAL have a similar sensitivity and specificity to actigraphy for two-stage categorisation of sleep and can be used as a practical alternative to polysomnography for two-stage categorisation of sleep and four-stage categorisation of sleep.
(1) 在两种功能(即睡眠自动检测(WHOOP-AUTO)和手动调整睡眠(WHOOP-MANUAL))下,比较活动记录仪(ACTICAL)和市售睡眠可穿戴设备(即 WHOOP)对睡眠的两阶段分类(睡眠或清醒)与多导睡眠图的比较;(2) 在四阶段分类(清醒、浅睡眠、慢波睡眠(SWS)或快速眼动睡眠(REM))下,比较 WHOOP-AUTO 和 WHOOP-MANUAL 与多导睡眠图的比较。六名健康成年人(男性 = 3;女性 = 3;年龄:23.0 ± 2.2 岁)参加了为期 9 晚的方案。使用差异测试、Bland-Altman 比较和 30 秒逐秒比较,将 ACTICAL、WHOOP-AUTO 和 WHOOP-MANUAL 评估的 54 个睡眠与多导睡眠图进行比较。与多导睡眠图相比,ACTICAL 高估了总睡眠时间(37.6 分钟)并低估了清醒时间(-37.6 分钟);WHOOP-AUTO 低估了 SWS(-15.5 分钟);而 WHOOP-MANUAL 低估了清醒时间(-16.7 分钟)。对于 ACTICAL,睡眠的灵敏度、清醒的特异性和总一致性分别为 98%、60%和 89%。对于 WHOOP-AUTO,睡眠、清醒和两阶段和四阶段睡眠分类的总一致性的灵敏度分别为 90%、60%、86%和 63%。对于 WHOOP-MANUAL,睡眠、清醒和两阶段和四阶段睡眠分类的灵敏度分别为 97%、45%、90%和 62%。WHOOP-AUTO 和 WHOOP-MANUAL 对 ACTICAL 两阶段睡眠分类具有相似的灵敏度和特异性,可作为多导睡眠图两阶段睡眠分类和四阶段睡眠分类的实用替代方法。