Terri Blackwell1, Misti Paudel2, Susan Redline3, Sonia Ancoli-Israel4, Katie L Stone5. 1. California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, United States. Electronic address: tblackwell@sfcc-cpmc.net. 2. Division of Epidemiology & Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States. 3. Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States. 5. California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The "first-night effect" of polysomnography (PSG) has been previously studied; however, the ability to quantify the sleep disruption level has been confounded with the use of PSG on all nights. We used actigraphy to quantify disruption level and examined characteristics associated with disruption. METHODS: Totally, 778 older men (76.2 ± 5.4 years) from a population-based study at six US centers underwent one night of in-home PSG. Actigraphy was performed on the PSG night and three subsequent nights. Actigraphically measured total sleep time (TST), sleep efficiency (SE), wake after sleep onset (WASO), and sleep onset latency (SOL) from the PSG night and subsequent nights were compared. Linear regression models were used to examine the association of characteristics and sleep disruption. RESULTS: On average, sleep on the PSG night was worse than the following night (p < 0.05, TST 21 ± 85 min less, SE 2.3 ± 11.3% less, WASO 4.9 ± 51.8 min more, SOL 6.6 ± 56.2 min more). Sleep on the PSG night was significantly worse than that two and three nights later. Characteristics associated with greater sleep disruption on the PSG night included older age, higher apnea-hypopnea index, worse neuromuscular function, and more depressive symptoms. Minorities and men with excessive daytime sleepiness slept somewhat better on the PSG night. CONCLUSIONS: Among older men, there was sleep disruption on the PSG night, which may lead to sleep time underestimation. The increase of sleep on the night after the PSG suggests that data from the second monitoring may overestimate sleep.
BACKGROUND: The "first-night effect" of polysomnography (PSG) has been previously studied; however, the ability to quantify the sleep disruption level has been confounded with the use of PSG on all nights. We used actigraphy to quantify disruption level and examined characteristics associated with disruption. METHODS: Totally, 778 older men (76.2 ± 5.4 years) from a population-based study at six US centers underwent one night of in-home PSG. Actigraphy was performed on the PSG night and three subsequent nights. Actigraphically measured total sleep time (TST), sleep efficiency (SE), wake after sleep onset (WASO), and sleep onset latency (SOL) from the PSG night and subsequent nights were compared. Linear regression models were used to examine the association of characteristics and sleep disruption. RESULTS: On average, sleep on the PSG night was worse than the following night (p < 0.05, TST 21 ± 85 min less, SE 2.3 ± 11.3% less, WASO 4.9 ± 51.8 min more, SOL 6.6 ± 56.2 min more). Sleep on the PSG night was significantly worse than that two and three nights later. Characteristics associated with greater sleep disruption on the PSG night included older age, higher apnea-hypopnea index, worse neuromuscular function, and more depressive symptoms. Minorities and men with excessive daytime sleepiness slept somewhat better on the PSG night. CONCLUSIONS: Among older men, there was sleep disruption on the PSG night, which may lead to sleep time underestimation. The increase of sleep on the night after the PSG suggests that data from the second monitoring may overestimate sleep.
Authors: O Le Bon; L Staner; G Hoffmann; M Dramaix; I San Sebastian; J R Murphy; M Kentos; I Pelc; P Linkowski Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2001 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Eric Orwoll; Janet Babich Blank; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Jane Cauley; Steven Cummings; Kristine Ensrud; Cora Lewis; Peggy M Cawthon; Robert Marcus; Lynn M Marshall; Joan McGowan; Kathy Phipps; Sherry Sherman; Marcia L Stefanick; Katie Stone Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Huiyong Zheng; MaryFran Sowers; Daniel J Buysse; Flavia Consens; Howard M Kravitz; Karen A Matthews; Jane F Owens; Ellen B Gold; Martica Hall Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Terri Blackwell; Sonia Ancoli-Israel; Philip R Gehrman; Jennifer L Schneider; Kathryn L Pedula; Katie L Stone Journal: Sleep Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Minxuan Huang; Donald L Bliwise; Martica H Hall; Dayna A Johnson; Richard P Sloan; Amit Shah; Jack Goldberg; Yi-An Ko; Nancy Murrah; Oleksiy M Levantsevych; Lucy Shallenberger; Rami Abdulbagki; J Douglas Bremner; Viola Vaccarino Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2022-03-01
Authors: Tara S Rogers; Stephanie Harrison; Christine Swanson; Jane A Cauley; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Eric Orwoll; Katie L Stone; Nancy E Lane Journal: Bone Rep Date: 2017-11-10
Authors: Christian Veauthier; Juliane Ryczewski; Sebastian Mansow-Model; Karen Otte; Bastian Kayser; Martin Glos; Christoph Schöbel; Friedemann Paul; Alexander U Brandt; Thomas Penzel Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Florent Baty; Maximilian Boesch; Sandra Widmer; Simon Annaheim; Piero Fontana; Martin Camenzind; René M Rossi; Otto D Schoch; Martin H Brutsche Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-01-04 Impact factor: 3.576