American Sleep Disorders Association and Sleep Research Society
Abstract
Objective: The present study explores the clinical utility and sensitivity of
actigraphy as an outcome measure in the treatment of chronic insomnia. Design: Following a screening-adaptation night, polysomnography, actigraphy,
and sleep-diary data were collected in the sleep laboratory for 2
baseline nights and 2 posttreatment nights. Setting: A university-affiliated sleep disorders center.
Participants: Seventeen participants with chronic primary insomnia.
Mean age was 41.6 years. Interventions: Participants took part in a treatment protocol investigating
different sequential treatments for insomnia (these results are reported
elsewhere). Measurements and Results: Compared to polysomnography, both actigraphy
and sleep-diary instruments underestimated total sleep time and sleep efficiency and overestimated total wake time. Also, actigraphy
underestimated sleep-onset latency while the sleep diary overestimated it
as compared to polysomnography. Actigraphy data were more accurate
than sleep-diary data when compared to polysomnography. Finally, actigraphy
was sensitive in detecting the effects of treatment on several sleep
parameters. Conclusions: These results suggest that actigraphy is a useful device for
measuring treatment response and that it should be used as a complement
to sleep-diary evaluation
