Dong An, J. Selvanathan, J. Wong, C. Suen, S. Mir, Marina F Englesakis, F. Chung
{"title":"活动记录仪测量慢性疼痛患者睡眠的效用及其与其他睡眠测量的一致性:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Dong An, J. Selvanathan, J. Wong, C. Suen, S. Mir, Marina F Englesakis, F. Chung","doi":"10.35248/2167-0277.19.9.308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There may be a bidirectional relationship between sleep and pain in patients with chronic pain. Actigraphy is increasingly being used as a non-invasive and objective method to assess sleep in chronic pain patients. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the utility of actigraphy in chronic pain patients. Additionally, meta-analyses were conducted to compare sleep parameters measured by actigraphy with those measured by sleep diary and polysomnography. Medline (1946-2019), Medline In-Process (May 2019), Embase (1947-2019), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1991-2019), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005-2019), and PubMed-NOTMedline (1946-2019) were searched for studies using actigraphy to measure sleep in chronic pain patients. Using the random effects model, meta-analyses were conducted to examine the concordance of actigraphy versus sleep diary and actigraphy versus polysomnography for commonly measured sleep parameters. Thirty-four studies with 3,590 patients were included. As an adjunct to sleep diary, actigraphy detected improvements in various sleep parameters after interventions in 10 studies and provided a useful objective sleep metric when comparing pain patients with healthy subjects in four studies; however, diary measurements were more “sensitive”. Comparing sleep diary versus actigraphy, sleep onset latency was significantly lower with actigraphy (mean difference of 22.7 minutes lower; 95% confidence interval: 13.2 to 32.2 minutes lower; p<0.01). No sleep parameters were significantly different between polysomnography and actigraphy; however, the confidence intervals were large. Actigraphy is an objective assessment tool that is being increasingly utilized to measure sleep in chronic pain patients. Based on studies that have measured sleep with both sleep diary and actigraphy, there are intrinsic differences between the two assessment methods as actigraphy lacks the cognitive component of subjective measures. Even though no differences in sleep parameters were detected between actigraphy and polysomnography, it cannot be established that the two are equivalent objective measures because of the limited number of studies and large variability.","PeriodicalId":73946,"journal":{"name":"Journal of sleep disorders & therapy","volume":"9 1","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Utility of Actigraphy to Measure Sleep in Chronic Pain Patients and Its Concordance with Other Sleep Measures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Dong An, J. Selvanathan, J. Wong, C. Suen, S. Mir, Marina F Englesakis, F. Chung\",\"doi\":\"10.35248/2167-0277.19.9.308\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There may be a bidirectional relationship between sleep and pain in patients with chronic pain. Actigraphy is increasingly being used as a non-invasive and objective method to assess sleep in chronic pain patients. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the utility of actigraphy in chronic pain patients. Additionally, meta-analyses were conducted to compare sleep parameters measured by actigraphy with those measured by sleep diary and polysomnography. Medline (1946-2019), Medline In-Process (May 2019), Embase (1947-2019), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1991-2019), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005-2019), and PubMed-NOTMedline (1946-2019) were searched for studies using actigraphy to measure sleep in chronic pain patients. Using the random effects model, meta-analyses were conducted to examine the concordance of actigraphy versus sleep diary and actigraphy versus polysomnography for commonly measured sleep parameters. Thirty-four studies with 3,590 patients were included. As an adjunct to sleep diary, actigraphy detected improvements in various sleep parameters after interventions in 10 studies and provided a useful objective sleep metric when comparing pain patients with healthy subjects in four studies; however, diary measurements were more “sensitive”. Comparing sleep diary versus actigraphy, sleep onset latency was significantly lower with actigraphy (mean difference of 22.7 minutes lower; 95% confidence interval: 13.2 to 32.2 minutes lower; p<0.01). No sleep parameters were significantly different between polysomnography and actigraphy; however, the confidence intervals were large. Actigraphy is an objective assessment tool that is being increasingly utilized to measure sleep in chronic pain patients. Based on studies that have measured sleep with both sleep diary and actigraphy, there are intrinsic differences between the two assessment methods as actigraphy lacks the cognitive component of subjective measures. Even though no differences in sleep parameters were detected between actigraphy and polysomnography, it cannot be established that the two are equivalent objective measures because of the limited number of studies and large variability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of sleep disorders & therapy\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"1-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of sleep disorders & therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35248/2167-0277.19.9.308\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of sleep disorders & therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35248/2167-0277.19.9.308","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
摘要
慢性疼痛患者的睡眠与疼痛之间可能存在双向关系。作为一种非侵入性、客观的慢性疼痛患者睡眠评估方法,活动描记术正被越来越多地应用。本系统综述旨在评估活动描记术在慢性疼痛患者中的应用。此外,还进行了荟萃分析,比较活动描记仪测量的睡眠参数与睡眠日记和多导睡眠描记仪测量的睡眠参数。检索了Medline(1946-2019)、Medline in - process(2019年5月)、Embase(1947-2019年)、Cochrane中央对照试验登记册(1991-2019年)、Cochrane系统评价数据库(2005-2019年)和PubMed-NOTMedline(1946-2019年),以检索使用活动描记法测量慢性疼痛患者睡眠的研究。采用随机效应模型,进行meta分析以检验活动描记术与睡眠日记、活动描记术与多导睡眠描记术在常用睡眠参数测量上的一致性。34项研究共纳入3590名患者。作为睡眠日记的辅助手段,活动描记术在10项研究中检测到干预后各种睡眠参数的改善,并在4项研究中将疼痛患者与健康受试者进行比较时提供了有用的客观睡眠指标;然而,日记测量更“敏感”。对比睡眠日记和活动描记术,活动描记术的睡眠发作潜伏期显著降低(平均差22.7分钟;95%置信区间:低13.2 ~ 32.2分钟;p < 0.01)。多导睡眠图与活动图的睡眠参数无显著差异;然而,置信区间很大。活动记录仪是一种客观的评估工具,越来越多地用于测量慢性疼痛患者的睡眠。根据同时使用睡眠日记和活动描记法测量睡眠的研究,两种评估方法存在内在差异,因为活动描记法缺乏主观测量的认知成分。尽管在活动描记仪和多导睡眠描记仪之间没有检测到睡眠参数的差异,但由于研究数量有限且变异性较大,因此不能确定两者是等效的客观测量。
The Utility of Actigraphy to Measure Sleep in Chronic Pain Patients and Its Concordance with Other Sleep Measures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
There may be a bidirectional relationship between sleep and pain in patients with chronic pain. Actigraphy is increasingly being used as a non-invasive and objective method to assess sleep in chronic pain patients. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the utility of actigraphy in chronic pain patients. Additionally, meta-analyses were conducted to compare sleep parameters measured by actigraphy with those measured by sleep diary and polysomnography. Medline (1946-2019), Medline In-Process (May 2019), Embase (1947-2019), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1991-2019), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005-2019), and PubMed-NOTMedline (1946-2019) were searched for studies using actigraphy to measure sleep in chronic pain patients. Using the random effects model, meta-analyses were conducted to examine the concordance of actigraphy versus sleep diary and actigraphy versus polysomnography for commonly measured sleep parameters. Thirty-four studies with 3,590 patients were included. As an adjunct to sleep diary, actigraphy detected improvements in various sleep parameters after interventions in 10 studies and provided a useful objective sleep metric when comparing pain patients with healthy subjects in four studies; however, diary measurements were more “sensitive”. Comparing sleep diary versus actigraphy, sleep onset latency was significantly lower with actigraphy (mean difference of 22.7 minutes lower; 95% confidence interval: 13.2 to 32.2 minutes lower; p<0.01). No sleep parameters were significantly different between polysomnography and actigraphy; however, the confidence intervals were large. Actigraphy is an objective assessment tool that is being increasingly utilized to measure sleep in chronic pain patients. Based on studies that have measured sleep with both sleep diary and actigraphy, there are intrinsic differences between the two assessment methods as actigraphy lacks the cognitive component of subjective measures. Even though no differences in sleep parameters were detected between actigraphy and polysomnography, it cannot be established that the two are equivalent objective measures because of the limited number of studies and large variability.