Suppr超能文献

比较癌症幸存者的睡眠指标:自我报告的睡眠日记与客观可穿戴睡眠追踪器。

Comparing sleep measures in cancer survivors: Self-reported sleep diary versus objective wearable sleep tracker.

作者信息

Li Xiaotong, Mao Jun J, Garland Sheila N, Root James, Li Susan Q, Ahles Tim, Liou Kevin T

机构信息

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Memorial University of Newfoundland, Newfoundland and Labrador.

出版信息

Res Sq. 2023 Oct 9:rs.3.rs-3407984. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3407984/v1.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Cancer survivors are increasingly using wearable fitness trackers, but it's unclear if they match traditional self-reported sleep diaries. We aimed to compare sleep data from Fitbit and the Consensus Sleep Diary (CSD) in this group.

METHODS

We analyzed data from two randomized clinical trials, using both CSD and Fitbit to collect sleep outcomes: total sleep time (TST), wake time after sleep onset (WASO), number of awakenings (NWAK), time in bed (TIB) and sleep efficiency (SE). Insomnia severity was measured by Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). We used the Wilcoxon Singed Ranks Test, Spearman's rank correlation coefficients, and the Mann-Whitney Test to compare sleep outcomes and assess their ability to distinguish insomnia severity levels between CSD and Fitbit data.

RESULTS

Among 62 participants, compared to CSD, Fitbit recorded longer TST by an average of 14.6 (SD = 84.9) minutes, longer WASO by an average of 28.7 (SD = 40.5) minutes, more NWAK by an average of 16.7 (SD = 6.6) times per night, and higher SE by an average of 7.1% (SD = 14.4); but shorter TIB by an average of 24.4 (SD = 71.5) minutes. All the differences were statistically significant (all p < 0.05), except for TST (p = 0.38). Moderate correlations were found for TST (r = 0.41, p = 0.001) and TIB (r = 0.44, p < 0.001). Compared to no/mild insomnia group, participants with clinical insomnia reported more NWAK (p = 0.009) and lower SE (p = 0.029) as measured by CSD, but Fitbit outcomes didn't.

CONCLUSIONS

TST was the only similar outcome between Fitbit and CSD. Our study highlights the advantages, disadvantages, and clinical utilization of sleep trackers in oncology.

摘要

目的

癌症幸存者越来越多地使用可穿戴健身追踪器,但尚不清楚这些追踪器与传统的自我报告睡眠日记是否相符。我们旨在比较该群体中Fitbit和共识睡眠日记(CSD)的睡眠数据。

方法

我们分析了两项随机临床试验的数据,同时使用CSD和Fitbit收集睡眠结果:总睡眠时间(TST)、睡眠开始后的清醒时间(WASO)、觉醒次数(NWAK)、卧床时间(TIB)和睡眠效率(SE)。失眠严重程度通过失眠严重程度指数(ISI)进行测量。我们使用威尔科克森符号秩检验、斯皮尔曼等级相关系数和曼-惠特尼检验来比较睡眠结果,并评估它们区分CSD和Fitbit数据之间失眠严重程度水平的能力。

结果

在62名参与者中,与CSD相比,Fitbit记录的TST平均长14.6(标准差=84.9)分钟,WASO平均长28.7(标准差=40.5)分钟,每晚NWAK平均多16.7(标准差=6.6)次,SE平均高7.1%(标准差=14.4);但TIB平均短24.4(标准差=71.5)分钟。除TST外(p=0.38),所有差异均具有统计学意义(所有p<0.05)。发现TST(r=0.41,p=0.001)和TIB(r=0.44,p<0.001)存在中度相关性。与无/轻度失眠组相比,临床失眠参与者通过CSD测量的NWAK更多(p=0.009),SE更低(p=0.029),但Fitbit的结果并非如此。

结论

TST是Fitbit和CSD之间唯一相似的结果。我们的研究突出了睡眠追踪器在肿瘤学中的优点、缺点及临床应用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验