Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Study objectiveThis proof-of-concept study aimed to determine whether the combined features of two non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep biomarkers acquired predominantly in-home could characterize different neurodegenerative disorders.MethodsSleep spindle duration and non-REM hypertonia (NRH) were evaluated in seven groups including a control group (CG = 61), and participants with isolated REM sleep behavior disorder (iRBD = 19), mild cognitive impairment (MCI = 41), Parkinson disease (PD = 16), Alzheimer disease dementia (ADem = 29), dementia with Lewy Bodies or Parkinson disease dementia (LBD = 19) and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP = 13). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Mann-Whitney U, intra-class (ICC) and Spearman ranked correlations, Bland-Altman plots and Kappa scores, Chi-square and Fisher exact probability test, and multiple-logistic regression were focused primarily on spindle duration and NRH and the frequencies assigned to the four normal/abnormal spindle duration/NRH combinations.ResultsANOVA identified group differences in age, sleep efficiency, REM, NRH (p p = 0.015), Spindle duration and NRH each demonstrated good night-to-night reliabilities (ICC = 0.95 and 0.75, Kappa = 0.93 and 0.66, respectively) and together exhibited an association in the PD and LBD groups only (p p p ConclusionThe NREM sleep biomarkers spindle duration and NRH may be useful in distinguishing patients with different neurodegenerative disorders. Larger prospective cohort studies are needed to determine whether spindle duration and NRH can be combined for prodromal assessment and/or monitoring disease progression.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.