Rahimi Matthew M, Phillips Craig L, Marshall Nathaniel S, Wassing Rick, Pun Teha, Grunstein Ron R, Gordon Christopher J
CIRUS Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Sleep Breath. 2025 Apr 15;29(2):161. doi: 10.1007/s11325-025-03326-y.
To evaluate the reliability of the GeneActiv actigraphy device in measuring sleep parameters and compare its performance with polysomnography (PSG) in older adults with self-reported sleep disturbances.
This sub-study was part of a pilot double-blinded randomized controlled crossover trial (CleverLights Study, ANZCTR ID 12619000138189). Participants (n = 12, mean age 67.7 years) underwent two nights of sleep studies with simultaneous GeneActiv actigraphy and PSG, separated by a 2-week interval. Sleep parameters including time in bed (TIB), total sleep time (TST), wake after sleep onset (WASO), sleep onset latency (SOL), sleep efficiency (SE), and number of awakenings were assessed. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots were used to determine reliability and agreement between methods.
GeneActiv actigraphy demonstrated strong correlations with PSG for TST (ICC = 0.79, p = 0.001) and SE (ICC = 0.85, p < 0.001), but tended to overestimate these parameters. Actigraphy also significantly underestimated the number of awakenings (ICC = 0.45, p = 0.021). Correlations with observed TIB (ICC = 0.30, p = 0.433), WASO (ICC = 0.33, p = 0.386), and SOL (ICC = 0.32, p = 0.056) were non-significant. Bland-Altman plots revealed proportional bias, especially in SOL and the number of awakenings.
Compared to PSG, the GeneActiv actigraphy device provides reliable measurements for total sleep time and sleep efficiency, but agreement was weaker for wake after sleep onset, sleep onset latency, and the number of awakenings. The device showed consistent performance across multiple nights, suggesting good reproducibility. However, it systematically overestimated total sleep time and underestimates wake-related parameters, hence it may not fully replace PSG for detailed sleep assessments.
评估GeneActiv活动记录仪在测量睡眠参数方面的可靠性,并将其性能与多导睡眠图(PSG)在自我报告有睡眠障碍的老年人中的性能进行比较。
本亚研究是一项试点双盲随机对照交叉试验(CleverLights研究,澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验注册中心识别号12619000138189)的一部分。参与者(n = 12,平均年龄67.7岁)进行了两晚的睡眠研究,同时使用GeneActiv活动记录仪和PSG,间隔2周。评估了包括卧床时间(TIB)、总睡眠时间(TST)、睡眠开始后觉醒时间(WASO)、睡眠开始潜伏期(SOL)、睡眠效率(SE)和觉醒次数在内的睡眠参数。使用组内相关系数(ICC)和Bland-Altman图来确定方法之间的可靠性和一致性。
GeneActiv活动记录仪显示TST(ICC = 0.79,p = 0.001)和SE(ICC = 0.85,p < 0.001)与PSG有很强的相关性,但往往高估了这些参数。活动记录仪还显著低估了觉醒次数(ICC = 0.45,p = 0.021)。与观察到的TIB(ICC = 0.30,p = )%E