Integrative Medicine Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 321 East 61st Street, 4th Floor, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Department of Psychology and Oncology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.
Support Care Cancer. 2024 Aug 21;32(9):601. doi: 10.1007/s00520-024-08788-6.
Cancer survivors are increasingly using wearable fitness trackers, but it is 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.
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 signed rank 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.
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 there were no differences measured by Fitbit.
TST was the only similar outcome between Fitbit and CSD. Our study highlights the advantages, disadvantages, and clinical utilization of sleep trackers in oncology.
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是否与传统的自我报告睡眠日记相符。我们旨在比较这组人群中来自 Fitbit 和共识睡眠日记 (CSD) 的睡眠数据。
我们分析了两项随机临床试验的数据，同时使用 CSD 和 Fitbit 来收集睡眠结果：总睡眠时间 (TST)、睡眠起始后醒来时间 (WASO)、醒来次数 (NWAK)、在床上时间 (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 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验、Spearman 秩相关系数和 Mann-Whitney 检验来比较睡眠结果，并评估它们在区分 CSD 和 Fitbit 数据中的失眠严重程度水平方面的能力。
在 62 名参与者中，与 CSD 相比，Fitbit 平均记录的 TST 长 14.6（SD=84.9）分钟，WASO 长 28.7（SD=40.5）分钟，NWAK 每晚多 16.7（SD=6.6）次，SE 高 7.1%（SD=14.4）；但 TIB 短 24.4（SD=71.5）分钟。所有差异均具有统计学意义（均 p<0.05），除了 TST（p=0.38）。TST（r=0.41，p=0.001）和 TIB（r=0.44，p<0.001）相关性适中。与无/轻度失眠组相比，CSD 测量的有临床失眠症的参与者 NWAK 更多（p=0.009），SE 更低（p=0.029），但 Fitbit 测量的结果则无差异。
TST 是 Fitbit 和 CSD 之间唯一相似的结果。我们的研究强调了睡眠追踪器在肿瘤学中的优势、劣势和临床应用。
