INTRODUCTION: It is unclear whether actimetry can be reliably used to measure sleep in severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. We compared polysomnography (PSG) with actimetric assessment of sleep on an epoch-by-epoch basis in subjects with and without OSA. METHODS: 21 subjects were recorded with simultaneous overnight standard PSG and actimetry. RESULTS: 10 subjects with apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) <10 (6.5 +/- 2.8/h) were classified as non-OSA subjects and 11 subjects with AHI >10 (42.0 +/- 27.3/h) were classified as OSA subjects. Overall sensitivity and specificity for actimetry to identify sleep was 94.6% and 40.6%, respectively, with an overall mean sleep/wake simple agreement of 84.6% and kappa of 0.38. There was no difference in agreement between non-OSA and OSA subjects (simple agreement: 83% vs. 86%, p = 0.73; kappa: 0.35 vs. 0.40, p = 0.73). The kappa agreement did not correlate with PSG arousal index (r = -0.21, p = 0.36) but declined with reduced sleep efficiency (r = 0.66, p = 0.001). There was no systematic difference (all p > 0.40) between actimetry and PSG in sleep latency, total sleep time and sleep efficiency, although correlations between the measurements using the two techniques were generally poor. However, while actimetry systematically underestimated wake after sleep onset (WASO) (35.5 +/- 18.8 vs. 59.4 +/- 35.1, p = 0.009), fragmentation index measured by actimetry only underestimated arousal index measured by PSG in OSA patients (23.9 +/- 17.8 vs. 33.1 +/- 18.5, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to prior reports, epoch-by-epoch comparison of sleep/wake scoring showed similar fair agreement between actimetry and PSG in subjects with or without OSA. Fragmentation index by actimetry may underestimate arousals caused by respiratory events and offer misleading results in severe OSA patients.
INTRODUCTION: It is unclear whether actimetry can be reliably used to measure sleep in severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. We compared polysomnography (PSG) with actimetric assessment of sleep on an epoch-by-epoch basis in subjects with and without OSA. METHODS: 21 subjects were recorded with simultaneous overnight standard PSG and actimetry. RESULTS: 10 subjects with apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) <10 (6.5 +/- 2.8/h) were classified as non-OSA subjects and 11 subjects with AHI >10 (42.0 +/- 27.3/h) were classified as OSA subjects. Overall sensitivity and specificity for actimetry to identify sleep was 94.6% and 40.6%, respectively, with an overall mean sleep/wake simple agreement of 84.6% and kappa of 0.38. There was no difference in agreement between non-OSA and OSA subjects (simple agreement: 83% vs. 86%, p = 0.73; kappa: 0.35 vs. 0.40, p = 0.73). The kappa agreement did not correlate with PSG arousal index (r = -0.21, p = 0.36) but declined with reduced sleep efficiency (r = 0.66, p = 0.001). There was no systematic difference (all p > 0.40) between actimetry and PSG in sleep latency, total sleep time and sleep efficiency, although correlations between the measurements using the two techniques were generally poor. However, while actimetry systematically underestimated wake after sleep onset (WASO) (35.5 +/- 18.8 vs. 59.4 +/- 35.1, p = 0.009), fragmentation index measured by actimetry only underestimated arousal index measured by PSG in OSA patients (23.9 +/- 17.8 vs. 33.1 +/- 18.5, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to prior reports, epoch-by-epoch comparison of sleep/wake scoring showed similar fair agreement between actimetry and PSG in subjects with or without OSA. Fragmentation index by actimetry may underestimate arousals caused by respiratory events and offer misleading results in severe OSA patients.
Authors: T Hori; Y Sugita; E Koga; S Shirakawa; K Inoue; S Uchida; H Kuwahara; M Kousaka; T Kobayashi; Y Tsuji; M Terashima; K Fukuda; N Fukuda Journal: Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 5.188
Authors: Michael Littner; Max Hirshkowitz; Milton Kramer; Sheldon Kapen; W McDowell Anderson; Dennis Bailey; Richard B Berry; David Davila; Stephen Johnson; Clete Kushida; Daniel I Loube; Merrill Wise; B Tucker Woodson Journal: Sleep Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Sonia Ancoli-Israel; Roger Cole; Cathy Alessi; Mark Chambers; William Moorcroft; Charles P Pollak Journal: Sleep Date: 2003-05-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Nathan L Johnson; H Lester Kirchner; Carol L Rosen; Amy Storfer-Isser; Lydia N Cartar; Sonia Ancoli-Israel; Judy L Emancipator; Anna Marie Kibler; Susan Redline Journal: Sleep Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Catherine Duclos; Marie Dumont; Caroline Arbour; Jean Paquet; Hélène Blais; David K Menon; Louis De Beaumont; Francis Bernard; Nadia Gosselin Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jessie P Bakker; Jia Weng; Rui Wang; Susan Redline; Naresh M Punjabi; Sanjay R Patel Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-03-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Alan L Hinderliter; Faye S Routledge; James A Blumenthal; Gary Koch; Michael A Hussey; William K Wohlgemuth; Andrew Sherwood Journal: J Am Soc Hypertens Date: 2013-07-12
Authors: Gregory J Tranah; Neeta Parimi; Terri Blackwell; Sonia Ancoli-Israel; Kristine E Ensrud; Jane A Cauley; Susan Redline; Nancy Lane; Misti L Paudel; Teresa A Hillier; Kristine Yaffe; Steven R Cummings; Katie L Stone Journal: BMC Womens Health Date: 2010-05-04 Impact factor: 2.809
Authors: Elisabet Ortiz-Tudela; Antonio Martinez-Nicolas; Manuel Campos; María Ángeles Rol; Juan Antonio Madrid Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2010-11-11 Impact factor: 4.475
Authors: Li Weimin; Wang Rongguang; Huang Dongyan; Liu Xiaoli; Jin Wei; Yang Shiming Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2013-05-25 Impact factor: 2.503