Validation of sleep measurement in a multisensor consumer grade wearable device in healthy young adults.
actigraphy
consumer wearable
photoplethysmography
polysomnogrrahy
sleep tracker
validation
Journal
Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine
ISSN: 1550-9397
Titre abrégé: J Clin Sleep Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101231977
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 06 2020
15 06 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
13
2
2020
medline:
24
6
2021
entrez:
13
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Our objective was to examine the ability of a consumer-grade wearable device (Basis B1) with accelerometer and heart rate technology to assess sleep patterns compared with polysomnography (PSG) and research-grade actigraphy in healthy adults. Eighteen adults underwent consecutive nights of sleep monitoring using Basis B1, actigraphy, and PSG; 40 nights were used in analyses. Discrepancies in gross sleep parameters and epoch-by-epoch agreements in sleep/wake classification were assessed. Basis B1 accuracy was 54.20 ± 8.20%, sensitivity was 98.90 ± 2.70%, and specificity was 8.10 ± 15.00%. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for distinguishing between the different sleep stages were 60-72%, 48-62%, and 57-86%, respectively. Pearson correlations demonstrated strong associations between Basis B1 and PSG estimates of sleep onset latency and total sleep time; moderate associations for sleep efficiency, duration of light sleep, and duration of rapid eye movement sleep; and a weak association for duration of deep sleep. Basis B1 significantly overestimates total sleep time, sleep efficiency, and duration of light sleep and significantly underestimates wake after sleep onset and duration of deep sleep. Basis B1 demonstrated utility for estimates of gross sleep parameters and performed similarly to actigraphy for estimates of total sleep time. Basis B1 specificity was poor, and Basis B1 is not useful for the assessment of wake. Basis B1 accuracy for sleep stages was better than chance but is not a suitable replacement for PSG assessment. Despite low cost, ease of use, and attractiveness for patients, consumer devices are not yet accurate or reliable enough to guide treatment decision making in clinical settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32048595
doi: 10.5664/jcsm.8362
pmc: PMC7849656
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
917-924Subventions
Organisme : CSRD VA
ID : IK2 CX002032
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : K01 MH109871
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2020 American Academy of Sleep Medicine.
Références
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
Sleep Breath. 2012 Sep;16(3):913-7
pubmed: 21971963
J Psychosom Res. 2017 Jun;97:38-44
pubmed: 28606497
J Clin Sleep Med. 2018 May 15;14(5):841-848
pubmed: 29734975
Chronobiol Int. 2015;32(7):1024-8
pubmed: 26158542
Behav Sleep Med. 2015;13 Suppl 1:S4-S38
pubmed: 26273913
J Clin Sleep Med. 2015 Dec 15;11(12):1455-61
pubmed: 26156958
J Sleep Res. 2011 Mar;20(1 Pt 2):214-22
pubmed: 20626612
J Clin Sleep Med. 2019 Sep 15;15(9):1337-1346
pubmed: 31538605
Sleep Med Rev. 2018 Aug;40:151-159
pubmed: 29395985
Sleep. 2004 Dec 15;27(8):1567-96
pubmed: 15683149
Lancet. 1995 Oct 21;346(8982):1085-7
pubmed: 7564793
Sleep Med Rev. 2017 Dec;36:116-124
pubmed: 28599983
Sleep. 2015 Aug 01;38(8):1323-30
pubmed: 26118555
Sleep. 2003 May 1;26(3):337-41
pubmed: 12749556
Sleep. 2008 Apr;31(4):489-95
pubmed: 18457236
Sleep. 2006 Feb;29(2):232-9
pubmed: 16494091
Physiol Behav. 2016 May 1;158:143-9
pubmed: 26969518
Sleep. 2015 Sep 01;38(9):1461-8
pubmed: 26158896
Radiology. 2012 Dec;265(3):910-6
pubmed: 23093680
J Clin Sleep Med. 2016 Mar;12(3):343-50
pubmed: 26446248
Sleep Med. 2016 May;21:47-56
pubmed: 27448472
Sleep. 2017 Jul 1;40(7):
pubmed: 28838130