Comparison of Actigraphic Performance between ActiWatch (r) and SleepWatch (r) : Focused on Sleep Parameters Utilizing Nocturnal Polysomnography as the Standard / 수면정신생리

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We attempted to compare the performance of 2 commercially available actigraphies with focus on sleep parameters, using polysomnography as standard comparison tool. METHODS: Fourteen normal volunteers (5 males and 9 females, mean age of 28+/-4.6 years) participated in this study. All the participants went through one night of polysomnography, simultaneously wearing 2 different kinds of actigraphies on each wrist. Polysomnographic and actigraphic data were stored, downloaded, and processed according to standard protocols and then statistically compared. RESULTS: Both ActiWatch (r) and SleepWatch (r) tended to overestimate the total sleep time, compared to the polysomnography. Sleep-Watch (r) tended to underestimate the sleep latency. The two actigraphs and the polysomnograph did not show significant difference of sleep efficiency, when compared with one another. In addition, all of the sleep parameters from the instruments showed linear correlations except in SleepWatch (r) 's sleep latency. The sleep parameters from the two actigraphs did not show much noteworthy difference, and linear relationships were found between the sleep parameters from the two actigraphs. There was no significant distinction in the results of the two different actigraphs. CONCLUSION: The results of two actigraphies can be used interchangeably since the sleep parameters of the two different actigraphies do not show significant differences statistically. Overall, it is not legitimate to use actigraphy as a substitute for polysomnography. However, since sleep parameters except sleep latency show linear correlations, actigraphy might possibly be used to follow up patients after polysomnography.