Relation between ambulatory actigraphy and laboratory polysomnography in insomnia practice and research

Actigraphy is increasingly used in practice and research studies because of its relative low cost and decreased subject burden. How multiple nights of at-home actigraphy compare to one independent night of in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG) has not been examined in people with insomnia. Using event markers (MARK) to set time in bed (TIB) compared to automatic program analysis (AUTO) has not been systematically evaluated. Subjects (n = 30) meeting DSM-5 criteria for insomnia and in-laboratory PSG sleep efficiency (SE) of <85% were studied. Subjects were free of psychiatric, sleep or circadian disorders, other chronic conditions and medications that effect sleep. Subjects had an in-laboratory PSG, then were sent home for 7 nights with Philips Actiwatch Spectrum Plus. Data were analysed using Philips Actiware version 6. Using the mean of seven nights, TIB, total sleep time (TST), SE, sleep-onset latency (SOL) and wake after sleep onset (WASO) were examined. Compared to PSG, AUTO showed longer TIB and TST and less WASO. MARK only differed from PSG with decreased WASO. Differences between the PSG night and the following night at home were found, with better sleep on the first night home. Actigraphy in people with insomnia over seven nights is a valid indicator of sleep compared to an independent in-laboratory PSG. Event markers increased the validity of actigraphy, showing no difference in TIB, TST, SE and SOL. AUTO was representative of SE and SOL. Increased SE and TST without increased TIB suggests possible compensatory sleep the first at night home after in-laboratory PSG.