Table 4.
Comparison of sleep efficiency (SE) from polysomnography (PSG) and actigraphy devices†
| N | PSG | Sleepwatch | Actiwatch | Actical | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sleep efficiency (%) | 30 | 87.3 ± 9.6 | 92.1 ± 7.0 | 92.1 ± 6.2 | 93.3 ± 6.3 |
| 88.4 (80.9, 95.6) | 93.4 (89.2, 96.5) | 93.8 (88.2, 97.0) | 96.6 (86.6, 98.3) | ||
| Difference with SE from PSG (%) | 30 | −4.8 ± 7.6 | −4.8 ± 7.3 | −6.2 ± 9.5 | |
| −5.2 (−9.0, −0.2) | −3.4 (−10.0, 0.9) | −4.3 (−11.6, −0.1) | |||
| Difference with SE from Actiwatch (%) | 30 | 0.0 ± 5.6 | −1.4 ± 3.8 | ||
| −0.4 (−1.0, 0.9) | −1.2 (−2.8, 1.1) |
(Mean ± SD; Median [IQR])
†
Sleepwatch, Sleepwatch actigraph (Ambulatory Monitoring, Inc., Ardsley, NY); Actiwatch, Actiwatch actigraph (Respironics, Pittsburgh, PA); Actical, Actical actigraph (Respironics, Pittsburgh, PA)