Kim Youngdeok, Kenyon Jonathan, Kim Jisu, Willis Kelcie D, Lanoye Autumn, Loughan Ashlee R
Department of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Neurooncol Pract. 2024 Jul 16;11(6):779-789. doi: 10.1093/nop/npae062. eCollection 2024 Dec.
The sleep diary and wrist-worn actigraphy are widely used to assess sleep disturbances in patients with primary brain tumors (PwPBT) in both clinical and research settings. However, their comparability has not been systematically examined. This study aimed to compare the sleep-wake patterns measured using the subjectively measured Consensus Sleep Diary (CSD) and the objectively measured ActiGraph (AG) actigraphy among PwPBT.
Sleep-wake patterns were assessed through CSD and AG over 14 consecutive nights across 2 occasions among 30 PwPBT. AG data were processed with AG proprietary and open-source GGIR (GGIR-based approach without the aid of sleep log algorithms), both with and without the assistance of CSD. Thirteen sleep parameters covering sleep-wake times, sleep disruptions, sleep durations, and sleep efficiency were compared using equivalency testing, mean absolute percent error (MAPE), and intra-class correlation. The estimated sleep parameters were correlated with perceived sleep quality and compared across the different sleep measures.
Significant between-measure equivalency was claimed for sleep-wake time parameters ( ≤ .05), with acceptable MAPEs (<10%). Sleep disruption parameters such as wake-after-sleep-onset were not statistically equivalent, with a large MAPE (≥10%) between the measures. Sleep efficiency was equivalent, though varied depending on how sleep efficiency was calculated. For most sleep parameters, ICCs were low and unacceptable (<0.50) suggesting incomparability between the measures. Lastly, CSD-derived sleep parameters exhibited a stronger correlation with perceived sleep quality compared to actigraphy measures.
The findings suggest the incomparability of sleep parameters estimated from different measures. Both subjective and objective measures are recommended to better describe sleep health among PwPBT.
睡眠日记和腕式活动记录仪在临床和研究环境中广泛用于评估原发性脑肿瘤患者(PwPBT)的睡眠障碍。然而,它们的可比性尚未得到系统检验。本研究旨在比较PwPBT中使用主观测量的共识睡眠日记(CSD)和客观测量的ActiGraph(AG)活动记录仪所测量的睡眠-觉醒模式。
在30名PwPBT患者中,分两次连续14个晚上通过CSD和AG评估睡眠-觉醒模式。AG数据使用AG专有和开源的GGIR(基于GGIR的方法,不借助睡眠日志算法)进行处理,处理过程中既有CSD的辅助,也有无CSD辅助的情况。使用等效性检验、平均绝对百分比误差(MAPE)和组内相关,比较了涵盖睡眠-觉醒时间、睡眠中断、睡眠时间和睡眠效率的13个睡眠参数。将估计的睡眠参数与感知睡眠质量进行关联,并在不同的睡眠测量方法之间进行比较。
睡眠-觉醒时间参数在测量方法之间具有显著的等效性(≤0.05),MAPE可接受(<10%)。睡眠中断参数,如睡眠开始后觉醒,在统计学上不等效,测量方法之间的MAPE较大(≥10%)。睡眠效率是等效的,不过取决于睡眠效率的计算方式。对于大多数睡眠参数,组内相关系数较低且不可接受(<0.50),表明测量方法之间不可比。最后,与活动记录仪测量相比,CSD得出的睡眠参数与感知睡眠质量的相关性更强。
研究结果表明不同测量方法估计的睡眠参数不可比。建议同时使用主观和客观测量方法,以更好地描述PwPBT患者的睡眠健康状况。