Abstract
Summary To assess the feasibility, the acceptability and the usefulness of home nocturnal infrared video in recording the frequency and the complexity of non‐rapid eye movement sleep parasomnias in adults, and in monitoring the treatment response. Twenty adult patients (10 males, median age 27.5 years) with a diagnosis of non‐rapid eye movement parasomnia were consecutively enrolled. They had a face‐to‐face interview, completed self‐reported questionnaires to assess clinical characteristics and performed a video‐polysomnography in the Sleep Unit. Patients were then monitored at home during at least five consecutive nights using infrared‐triggered cameras. They completed a sleep diary and questionnaires to evaluate the number of parasomniac episodes at home and the acceptability of the home nocturnal infrared video recording. Behavioural analyses were performed on home nocturnal infrared video and video‐polysomnography recordings. Eight patients treated by clonazepam underwent a second home nocturnal infrared video recording during five consecutive days. All patients had at least one parasomniac episode during the home nocturnal infrared video monitoring, compared with 75% during the video‐polysomnography. A minimum of three consecutive nights with home nocturnal infrared video was required to record at least one parasomniac episode. Most patients underestimated the frequency of episodes on the sleep diary compared with home nocturnal infrared video. Episodes recorded at home were often more complex than those recorded during the video‐polysomnography. The user‐perceived acceptability of the home nocturnal infrared video assessment was excellent. The frequency and the complexity of the parasomniac episodes decreased with clonazepam. Home nocturnal infrared video has good feasibility and acceptability, and may improve the evaluation of the phenotype and severity of the non‐rapid eye movement parasomnias and of the treatment response in an ecological setting.