Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
J Sleep Res. 2023 Oct;32(5):e13824. doi: 10.1111/jsr.13824. Epub 2023 Jan 25.
Mobile sleep-monitoring devices for consumer use have been gaining traction as a possible replacement to traditional polysomnography recordings. Such devices potentially offer detailed sleep analysis without requiring the use of designated sleep labs operated by qualified technicians. However, the accuracy of these mobile devices is often not sufficiently evaluated by independent researchers. Here, we compared the performance of two popular mobile electroencephalogram-based systems, the DREEM 3 headband and the Zmachine Insight+. Both devices can be used by participants with minimal training, and provide detailed sleep scoring previously validated by the respective developers in comparison to the gold-standard of polysomnography. A total of 25 participants used both devices simultaneously to record their sleep for two consecutive nights while also keeping a sleep log. We compared the devices' performance, both with each other and in relation to the sleep logs, using several well-known sleep metrics. In addition, we developed a Bayesian lower limit for the devices' expected epoch-by-epoch sleep stage agreement based on their previously published agreement with polysomnography, and compared it with our empirical findings. Results suggest that the Zmachine tends to overestimate periods of wakefulness, likely at the expense of N1/N2 detection, whereas the DREEM tends to underestimate wakefulness and mistake it for N1/N2, with both results more pronounced than previously reported. In addition, we found that the agreement between the devices tends to increase from night 1 to night 2. We formulate several recommendations for how best to use these devices based on our results.
移动睡眠监测设备已逐渐普及,成为传统多导睡眠记录的可能替代品。这些设备无需使用合格技术人员操作的指定睡眠实验室,就可以提供详细的睡眠分析。然而,这些移动设备的准确性往往没有经过独立研究人员的充分评估。在这里,我们比较了两种流行的基于脑电图的移动设备,即 DREEM 3 头带和 Zmachine Insight+。这两种设备都可以让接受过最少培训的参与者使用,并提供详细的睡眠评分,这是由各自的开发者与多导睡眠记录的金标准相比之前验证过的。共有 25 名参与者同时使用这两种设备连续记录了两晚的睡眠,同时还记录了睡眠日志。我们使用几个著名的睡眠指标比较了设备的性能,包括彼此之间以及与睡眠日志之间的性能。此外,我们根据之前发表的与多导睡眠记录的一致性,为设备的每个时段的预期睡眠阶段一致性开发了一个贝叶斯下限,并将其与我们的经验发现进行了比较。结果表明,Zmachine 倾向于高估清醒期,可能是以牺牲 N1/N2 检测为代价的,而 DREEM 则倾向于低估清醒期,并将其错误地归类为 N1/N2,这两个结果比之前报告的更为明显。此外,我们发现设备之间的一致性从第一晚到第二晚呈上升趋势。我们根据结果提出了一些关于如何最好地使用这些设备的建议。