Sleep and Breathing

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 913–917 | Cite as

Movement toward a novel activity monitoring device

  • Hawley E. Montgomery-Downs
  • Salvatore P. Insana
  • Jonathan A. Bond
Short Communication



Although polysomnography is necessary for diagnosis of most sleep disorders, it is also expensive, time-consuming, intrusive, and interferes with sleep. Field-based activity monitoring is increasingly used as an alternative measure that can be used to answer certain clinical and research questions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a novel activity monitoring device (Fitbit) compared to both polysomnography and standard actigraphy (Actiwatch-64).


To test validity, simultaneous Fitbit and actigraph were worn during standard overnight polysomnography by 24 healthy adults at the West Virginia University sleep research laboratory. To test inter-Fitbit reliability, three participants also wore two of the Fitbit devices overnight at home.


Fitbit showed high intradevice reliability =96.5–99.1. Fitbit and actigraph differed significantly on recorded total sleep time and sleep efficiency between each other and polysomnography. Bland–Altman plots indicated that both Fitbit and actigraph overestimated sleep efficiency and total sleep time. Sensitivity of both Fitbit and actigraphy for accurately identifying sleep was high within all sleep stages and during arousals; specificity of both Fitbit and actigraph for accurately identifying wake was poor. Specificity of actigraph was higher except for wake before sleep onset; sensitivity of Fitbit was higher in all sleep stages and during arousals.


The web-based Fitbit, available at a markedly reduced price and with several convenience factors compared to standard actigraphy, may be an acceptable activity measurement instrument for use with normative populations. However, Fitbit has the same specificity limitations as actigraphy; both devices consistently misidentify wake as sleep and thus overestimate both sleep time and quality. Use of the Fitbit will also require specific validation before it can be used to assess disordered populations and or different age groups.


Actigraphy Agreement Bland–Altman Fitbit Validation 



Support was provided by the West Virginia University Research Foundation. Amanda McBean, B.S., and Aubree Webb, B.S. ran the overnight polysomnographies.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Specifically, none of the authors has any relationship with the company that produces the Fitbit device or any actigraphy company.


  1. 1.
    McKnight-Eily LR, Liu Y, Perry GS, Presley-Cantrell LR, Strine TW, Lu H, Croft JB (2009) Perceived insufficient rest or sleep among adults—United States, 2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 58:1175–1179Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Institute of Medicine of the National Academies Leading Health Indicators for Healthy People 2020—Letter Report available at: (accessed 3/16/2011)
  3. 3.
    Agnew HW, Webb WB, Williams RL (1966) The first night effect: an EEG study of sleep. Psychophysiology 2:263–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morgenthaler T, Alessi C, Friedman L, Owens J, Kapur V, Boehlecke B, Brown T, Chesson A, Coleman J, Lee-Chiong T, Pancer J, Swick TJ (2007) Practice parameters for the use of actigraphy in the assessment of sleep and sleep disorders: an update for 2007. Sleep 30:519–529PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Souza L, Benedito-Silva A, Pires ML, Poyares D, Tufik S, Calil HM (2003) Further validation of actigraphy for sleep studies. Sleep 26:81–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Philips Respironics User’s Manual available at: (accessed 4/8/2011)
  7. 7.
    Fitbit User information available at: (accessed 4/8/11)
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Iber C, Ancoli-Israel S, Chesson A, Quan S (2007) The AASM manual for the scoring of sleep and associated events: rules, terminology and technical specifications, 1st edn. American Academy of Sleep Medicine, Westchester, ILGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Altman DG, Bland JM (1983) Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. The Statistician 32:307–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hawley E. Montgomery-Downs
    • 1
  • Salvatore P. Insana
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jonathan A. Bond
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  3. 3.Department of Public HealthWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA

Personalised recommendations