Polysomnography (PSG) is the “gold standard” for monitoring sleep. Alternatives to PSG are of interest for clinical, research, and personal use. Wrist-worn actigraph devices have been utilized in research settings for measures of sleep for over two decades. Whether sleep measures from commercially available devices are similarly valid is unknown. We sought to determine the validity of five wearable devices: Basis Health Tracker, Misfit Shine, Fitbit Flex, Withings Pulse O2, and a research-based actigraph, Actiwatch Spectrum. We used Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests to assess differences between devices relative to PSG and correlational analysis to assess the strength of the relationship. Data loss was greatest for Fitbit and Misfit. For all devices, we found no difference and strong correlation of total sleep time with PSG. Sleep efficiency differed from PSG for Withings, Misfit, Fitbit, and Basis, while Actiwatch mean values did not differ from that of PSG. Only mean values of sleep efficiency (time asleep/time in bed) from Actiwatch correlated with PSG, yet this correlation was weak. Light sleep time differed from PSG (nREM1 + nREM2) for all devices. Measures of Deep sleep time did not differ from PSG (SWS + REM) for Basis. These results reveal the current strengths and limitations in sleep estimates produced by personal health monitoring devices and point to a need for future development.
展开▼
机译：多导睡眠图（PSG）是监测睡眠的“黄金标准”。 PSG的替代品在临床，研究和个人使用方面都很受关注。腕戴式活动记录仪设备已在研究环境中用于测量睡眠，已有二十多年的历史。尚不清楚市售设备的睡眠措施是否同样有效。我们试图确定五种可穿戴设备的有效性：Basis Health Tracker，Misfit Shine，Fitbit Flex，Withings Pulse O2和以研究为基础的活动记录仪Actiwatch Spectrum。我们使用Wilcoxon Signed Rank检验来评估相对于PSG的设备之间的差异，并使用相关分析来评估这种关系的强度。对于Fitbit和Misfit，数据丢失最大。对于所有设备，我们发现总睡眠时间与PSG并没有差异，并且没有很强的相关性。对于Withings，Misfit，Fitbit和Basis，睡眠效率与PSG不同，而Actiwatch的平均值与PSG相同。仅来自Actiwatch的睡眠效率平均值（睡眠时间/卧床时间）与PSG相关，但这种相关性较弱。所有设备的浅睡眠时间均不同于PSG（nREM1 + nREM2）。深度睡眠时间的量度与PSG（SWS + REM）的基础无差异。这些结果揭示了个人健康监测设备产生的睡眠估计的当前优势和局限性，并指出了未来的发展需求。
展开▼
