Katherine M Sharkey1, Kelly Waters2, Richard P Millman3, Robin Moore4, Susan M Martin5, Ghada Bourjeily6. 1. Department of Medicine, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI ; Department of Psychiatry & Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI ; Sleep Disorders Center of Lifespan Hospitals, Providence, RI. 2. Department of Neurology, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI. 3. Department of Medicine, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI ; Sleep Disorders Center of Lifespan Hospitals, Providence, RI. 4. Sleep Disorders Center of Lifespan Hospitals, Providence, RI. 5. Women's Medicine Collaborative of Lifespan, Providence, RI. 6. Department of Medicine, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI ; Women's Medicine Collaborative of Lifespan, Providence, RI.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of using the Apnea Risk Evaluation System (ARES) Unicorder for detecting obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in pregnant women. METHODS: Sixteen pregnant women, mean age (SD) = 29.8 (5.4) years, average gestational age (SD) = 28.6 (6.3) weeks, mean body mass index (SD) = 44.7 (6.9) kg/m(2) with signs and symptoms of OSA wore the ARES Unicorder during one night of laboratory polysomnography (PSG). PSG was scored according to AASM 2007 criteria, and PSG AHI and RDI were compared to the ARES 1%, 3%, and 4% AHIs calculated with the ARES propriety software. RESULTS: Median PSG AHI and PSG RDI were 3.1 and 10.3 events/h of sleep, respectively. Six women had a PSG AHI ≥ 5 events/h of sleep and 11 had a PSG RDI ≥ 5 events/h of sleep. PSG AHI and RDI were strongly correlated with the ARES AHI measures. When compared with polysomnographic diagnosis of OSA, the ARES 3% algorithm provided the best balance between sensitivity (1.0 for PSG AHI, 0.91 for PSG RDI) and specificity (0.5 for PSG AHI, 0.8 for PSG RDI) for detecting sleep disordered breathing in our sample. CONCLUSIONS: The ARES Unicorder demonstrated reasonable consistency with PSG for diagnosing OSA in this small, heterogeneous sample of obese pregnant women.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of using the Apnea Risk Evaluation System (ARES) Unicorder for detecting obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in pregnant women. METHODS: Sixteen pregnant women, mean age (SD) = 29.8 (5.4) years, average gestational age (SD) = 28.6 (6.3) weeks, mean body mass index (SD) = 44.7 (6.9) kg/m(2) with signs and symptoms of OSA wore the ARES Unicorder during one night of laboratory polysomnography (PSG). PSG was scored according to AASM 2007 criteria, and PSG AHI and RDI were compared to the ARES 1%, 3%, and 4% AHIs calculated with the ARES propriety software. RESULTS: Median PSG AHI and PSG RDI were 3.1 and 10.3 events/h of sleep, respectively. Six women had a PSG AHI ≥ 5 events/h of sleep and 11 had a PSG RDI ≥ 5 events/h of sleep. PSG AHI and RDI were strongly correlated with the ARES AHI measures. When compared with polysomnographic diagnosis of OSA, the ARES 3% algorithm provided the best balance between sensitivity (1.0 for PSG AHI, 0.91 for PSG RDI) and specificity (0.5 for PSG AHI, 0.8 for PSG RDI) for detecting sleep disordered breathing in our sample. CONCLUSIONS: The ARES Unicorder demonstrated reasonable consistency with PSG for diagnosing OSA in this small, heterogeneous sample of obese pregnant women.
Authors: Robert P Skomro; John Gjevre; John Reid; Brian McNab; Sunita Ghosh; Maryla Stiles; Ruzica Jokic; Heather Ward; David Cotton Journal: Chest Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Bilgay Izci; Sascha E Martin; Kirsty C Dundas; Wang A Liston; Andrew A Calder; Neil J Douglas Journal: Sleep Med Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 3.492
Authors: Bilgay Izci; Renata L Riha; Sascha E Martin; Marjorie Vennelle; Wang A Liston; Kirsty C Dundas; Andrew A Calder; Neil J Douglas Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2002-10-31 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Louise M O'Brien; Alexandra S Bullough; Anita V Shelgikar; Mark C Chames; Roseanne Armitage; Ronald D Chervin Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2012-06-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Nancy A Collop; W McDowell Anderson; Brian Boehlecke; David Claman; Rochelle Goldberg; Daniel J Gottlieb; David Hudgel; Michael Sateia; Richard Schwab Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2007-12-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Francesca L Facco; Corette B Parker; Uma M Reddy; Robert M Silver; Judette M Louis; Robert C Basner; Judith H Chung; Frank P Schubert; Grace W Pien; Susan Redline; Daniel R Mobley; Matthew A Koch; Hyagriv N Simhan; Chia-Ling Nhan-Chang; Samuel Parry; William A Grobman; David M Haas; Deborah A Wing; Brian M Mercer; George R Saade; Phyllis C Zee Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Brittany N Link; Celine Eid; Maggie H Bublitz; Martino F Pengo; Myriam Salameh; Karin S Ludwig; Richard P Millman; Lance Dworkin; Ghada Bourjeily Journal: Sleep Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Margaret H Bublitz; Joao Filipe Monteiro; Andrew Caraganis; Susan Martin; Jeffrey Parker; Lucia Larson; Margaret A Miller; Ghada Bourjeily Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2018-01-15 Impact factor: 4.062