| Literature DB >> 30237769 |
Yishul Wei1, Jennifer R Ramautar1, Michele A Colombo1,2,3, Bart H W Te Lindert1, Eus J W Van Someren1,4,5.
Abstract
People with Insomnia Disorder (ID) not only experience abundant nocturnal mentation, but also report altered spontaneous mental content during daytime wakefulness, such as an increase in bodily experiences (heightened somatic awareness). Previous studies have shown that resting-state EEG can be temporally partitioned into quasi-stable microstates, and that these microstates form a small number of canonical classes that are consistent across people. Furthermore, the microstate classes have been associated with individual differences in resting mental content including somatic awareness. To address the hypothesis that altered resting mental content in ID would be reflected in an altered representation of the corresponding EEG microstates, we analyzed resting-state high-density EEG of 32 people with ID and 32 age- and sex-matched controls assessed during 5-min eyes-closed wakefulness. Using data-driven topographical k-means clustering, we found that 5 microstate classes optimally explained the EEG scalp voltage map sequences across participants. For each microstate class, 3 dynamic features were obtained: mean duration, frequency of occurrence, and proportional coverage time. People with ID had a shorter mean duration of class C microstates, and more frequent occurrence of class D microstates. The finding is consistent with previously established associations of these microstate properties with somatic awareness, and increased somatic awareness in ID. EEG microstate assessment could provide objective markers of subjective experience dimensions in studies on consciousness during the transition between wake and sleep, when self-report is not possible because it would interfere with the very process under study. Addressing somatic awareness may benefit psychotherapeutic treatment of insomnia.Entities:
Keywords: electrical neuroimaging; high-density EEG; insomnia disorder; mental content; microstate; resting state; somatic awareness; wakefulness
Year: 2018 PMID: 30237769 PMCID: PMC6135918 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00395
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 4.157
Characteristics of participants (mean ± standard deviation).
| Age, y | 46.8 ± 15.0 | 48.5 ± 14.1 | 0.64 |
| Sex, female/male | 26/6 | 25/7 | 1 |
| ISI | 2.00 ± 1.97 | 17.19 ± 3.75 | <0.0001 |
| BAI | 2.00 ± 2.33 | 6.42 ± 4.93 | 0.06 |
| BDI-IA | 2.00 ± 1.85 | 4.75 ± 3.84 | 0.11 |
| HADS—Anxiety | 4.33 ± 2.10 | 5.75 ± 2.38 | 0.06 |
| HADS—Depression | 1.88 ± 1.65 | 3.60 ± 3.30 | 0.09 |
ISI, Insomnia Severity Index; BAI, Beck Anxiety Inventory; BDI-IA, Beck Depression Inventory IA; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.
p-values are determined by Fisher exact test for sex and by Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for the other variables.
Figure 1(A) Group-level dispersion (i.e., within-cluster global dissimilarity) for 3- to 11-class models, displayed separately for people with Insomnia Disorder (ID, red line), healthy controls (CTRL, blue line), and all participants combined (black line). (B) Mean percentages of global variance explained by all microstate classes when microstate topographies resulting from 3- to 11-class models were fitted back to individual EEG data, displayed separately for people with Insomnia Disorder (ID, red line) and healthy controls (CTRL, blue line). Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 2Average topographic maps for the 5 optimal microstate classes (A–E) in people with Insomnia Disorder (ID) and healthy controls (CTRL). Note that by convention microstate labeling only depends on the spatial configuration while the absolute voltage and polarity are ignored.
Microstate dynamic features (mean ± standard deviation).
| Mean Duration (ms) | A | 53.88 ± 7.84 | 51.45 ± 8.62 | −0.30 | 0.45 |
| B | 57.55 ± 11.02 | 53.54 ± 7.89 | −0.42 | 0.18 | |
| C | 60.71 ± 16.74 | 52.69 ± 11.09 | −0.57 | 0.0045 | |
| D | 60.40 ± 10.60 | 62.67 ± 15.43 | 0.17 | 0.31 | |
| E | 50.47 ± 7.58 | 47.30 ± 6.69 | −0.44 | 0.30 | |
| Frequency of Occurrence (1/s) | A | 3.42 ± 0.87 | 3.64 ± 0.80 | 0.26 | 0.47 |
| B | 3.71 ± 0.45 | 3.89 ± 0.86 | 0.26 | 0.56 | |
| C | 3.67 ± 1.18 | 3.51 ± 1.41 | −0.12 | 0.47 | |
| D | 3.80 ± 1.61 | 4.45 ± 1.09 | 0.47 | 0.018 | |
| E | 3.07 ± 0.77 | 3.02 ± 0.89 | −0.05 | 0.78 | |
| Proportional Coverage Time (%) | A | 18.04 ± 3.47 | 18.63 ± 4.65 | 0.14 | 0.66 |
| B | 21.11 ± 3.92 | 20.50 ± 4.08 | −0.15 | 0.50 | |
| C | 22.70 ± 10.47 | 18.74 ± 8.51 | −0.42 | 0.10 | |
| D | 22.93 ± 9.92 | 28.02 ± 9.88 | 0.51 | 0.44 | |
| E | 15.23 ± 3.42 | 14.11 ± 4.14 | −0.29 | 0.34 |
p-values are determined by linear mixed-effects (for mean duration and frequency of occurrence) and Dirichlet (for proportional coverage time) regression models with Wald z-tests.