» Articles » PMID: 34609317

Validation of Fitbit Charge 2 Sleep and Heart Rate Estimates Against Polysomnographic Measures in Shift Workers: Naturalistic Study

Overview
Publisher JMIR Publications
Date 2021 Oct 5
PMID 34609317
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Multisensor fitness trackers offer the ability to longitudinally estimate sleep quality in a home environment with the potential to outperform traditional actigraphy. To benefit from these new tools for objectively assessing sleep for clinical and research purposes, multisensor wearable devices require careful validation against the gold standard of sleep polysomnography (PSG). Naturalistic studies favor validation.

Objective: This study aims to validate the Fitbit Charge 2 against portable home PSG in a shift-work population composed of 59 first responder police officers and paramedics undergoing shift work.

Methods: A reliable comparison between the two measurements was ensured through the data-driven alignment of a PSG and Fitbit time series that was recorded at night. Epoch-by-epoch analyses and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, the Matthews correlation coefficient, bias, and limits of agreement.

Results: Sleep onset and offset, total sleep time, and the durations of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep and non-rapid-eye movement sleep stages N1+N2 and N3 displayed unbiased estimates with nonnegligible limits of agreement. In contrast, the proprietary Fitbit algorithm overestimated REM sleep latency by 29.4 minutes and wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO) by 37.1 minutes. Epoch-by-epoch analyses indicated better specificity than sensitivity, with higher accuracies for WASO (0.82) and REM sleep (0.86) than those for N1+N2 (0.55) and N3 (0.78) sleep. Fitbit heart rate (HR) displayed a small underestimation of 0.9 beats per minute (bpm) and a limited capability to capture sudden HR changes because of the lower time resolution compared to that of PSG. The underestimation was smaller in N2, N3, and REM sleep (0.6-0.7 bpm) than in N1 sleep (1.2 bpm) and wakefulness (1.9 bpm), indicating a state-specific bias. Finally, Fitbit suggested a distribution of all sleep episode durations that was different from that derived from PSG and showed nonbiological discontinuities, indicating the potential limitations of the staging algorithm.

Conclusions: We conclude that by following careful data processing processes, the Fitbit Charge 2 can provide reasonably accurate mean values of sleep and HR estimates in shift workers under naturalistic conditions. Nevertheless, the generally wide limits of agreement hamper the precision of quantifying individual sleep episodes. The value of this consumer-grade multisensor wearable in terms of tackling clinical and research questions could be enhanced with open-source algorithms, raw data access, and the ability to blind participants to their own sleep data.

Citing Articles

Performance of consumer wrist-worn sleep tracking devices compared to polysomnography: a meta-analysis.

Lee Y, Lee J, Cho J, Kang Y, Choi J J Clin Sleep Med. 2024; 21(3):573-582.

PMID: 39484805 PMC: 11874098. DOI: 10.5664/jcsm.11460.


Sleep patterns and risk of chronic disease as measured by long-term monitoring with commercial wearable devices in the All of Us Research Program.

Zheng N, Annis J, Master H, Han L, Gleichauf K, Ching J Nat Med. 2024; 30(9):2648-2656.

PMID: 39030265 PMC: 11405268. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-03155-8.


Accuracy of parent-reported sleep duration among adolescents assessed using accelerometry.

Turan O, Garner J, Chang L, Isaiah A Pediatr Res. 2024; .

PMID: 38961167 PMC: 11825107. DOI: 10.1038/s41390-024-03393-z.


Evaluating reliability in wearable devices for sleep staging.

Birrer V, Elgendi M, Lambercy O, Menon C NPJ Digit Med. 2024; 7(1):74.

PMID: 38499793 PMC: 10948771. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01016-9.


Association between sleep quality and nocturnal erection monitor by RigiScan in erectile dysfunction patients: a prospective study using fitbit charge 2.

Zhang Y, Zhang W, Feng X, Liu G, Wu X, Jiang H Basic Clin Androl. 2023; 33(1):31.

PMID: 38008740 PMC: 10680263. DOI: 10.1186/s12610-023-00206-x.


References
1.
Borbely A, Rusterholz T, Achermann P . Three decades of continuous wrist-activity recording: analysis of sleep duration. J Sleep Res. 2017; 26(2):188-194. DOI: 10.1111/jsr.12492. View

2.
Karlen W, Floreano D . Adaptive sleep-wake discrimination for wearable devices. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2010; 58(4):920-6. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2010.2097261. View

3.
de Zambotti M, Cellini N, Goldstone A, Colrain I, Baker F . Wearable Sleep Technology in Clinical and Research Settings. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019; 51(7):1538-1557. PMC: 6579636. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001947. View

4.
Ako M, Kawara T, Uchida S, Miyazaki S, Nishihara K, Mukai J . Correlation between electroencephalography and heart rate variability during sleep. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2003; 57(1):59-65. DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1819.2003.01080.x. View

5.
Inderkum A, Tarokh L . High heritability of adolescent sleep-wake behavior on free, but not school days: a long-term twin study. Sleep. 2018; 41(3). DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsy004. View