R Nisha Aurora1, Rachel Swartz1, Naresh M Punjabi2. 1. Department of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 2. Department of Epidemiology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: npunjabi@jhu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The advent of home sleep testing has allowed for the development of an ambulatory care model for OSA that most health-care providers can easily deploy. Although automated algorithms that accompany home sleep monitors can identify and classify disordered breathing events, it is unclear whether manual scoring followed by expert review of home sleep recordings is of any value. Thus, this study examined the agreement between automated and manual scoring of home sleep recordings. METHODS: Two type 3 monitors (ApneaLink Plus [ResMed] and Embletta [Embla Systems]) were examined in distinct study samples. Data from manual and automated scoring were available for 200 subjects. Two thresholds for oxygen desaturation (≥ 3% and ≥ 4%) were used to define disordered breathing events. Agreement between manual and automated scoring was examined using Pearson correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: Automated scoring consistently underscored disordered breathing events compared with manual scoring for both sleep monitors irrespective of whether a ≥ 3% or ≥ 4% oxygen desaturation threshold was used to define the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). For the ApneaLink Plus monitor, Bland-Altman analyses revealed an average AHI difference between manual and automated scoring of 6.1 (95% CI, 4.9-7.3) and 4.6 (95% CI, 3.5-5.6) events/h for the ≥ 3% and ≥ 4% oxygen desaturation thresholds, respectively. Similarly for the Embletta monitor, the average difference between manual and automated scoring was 5.3 (95% CI, 3.2-7.3) and 8.4 (95% CI, 7.2-9.6) events/h, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although agreement between automated and manual scoring of home sleep recordings varies based on the device used, modest agreement was observed between the two approaches. However, manual review of home sleep test recordings can decrease the misclassification of OSA severity, particularly for those with mild disease. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01503164; www.clinicaltrials.gov.
BACKGROUND: The advent of home sleep testing has allowed for the development of an ambulatory care model for OSA that most health-care providers can easily deploy. Although automated algorithms that accompany home sleep monitors can identify and classify disordered breathing events, it is unclear whether manual scoring followed by expert review of home sleep recordings is of any value. Thus, this study examined the agreement between automated and manual scoring of home sleep recordings. METHODS: Two type 3 monitors (ApneaLink Plus [ResMed] and Embletta [Embla Systems]) were examined in distinct study samples. Data from manual and automated scoring were available for 200 subjects. Two thresholds for oxygen desaturation (≥ 3% and ≥ 4%) were used to define disordered breathing events. Agreement between manual and automated scoring was examined using Pearson correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: Automated scoring consistently underscored disordered breathing events compared with manual scoring for both sleep monitors irrespective of whether a ≥ 3% or ≥ 4% oxygen desaturation threshold was used to define the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). For the ApneaLink Plus monitor, Bland-Altman analyses revealed an average AHI difference between manual and automated scoring of 6.1 (95% CI, 4.9-7.3) and 4.6 (95% CI, 3.5-5.6) events/h for the ≥ 3% and ≥ 4% oxygen desaturation thresholds, respectively. Similarly for the Embletta monitor, the average difference between manual and automated scoring was 5.3 (95% CI, 3.2-7.3) and 8.4 (95% CI, 7.2-9.6) events/h, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although agreement between automated and manual scoring of home sleep recordings varies based on the device used, modest agreement was observed between the two approaches. However, manual review of home sleep test recordings can decrease the misclassification of OSA severity, particularly for those with mild disease. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01503164; www.clinicaltrials.gov.
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: Lien Desteghe; Jeroen M L Hendriks; R Doug McEvoy; Ching Li Chai-Coetzer; Paul Dendale; Prashanthan Sanders; Hein Heidbuchel; Dominik Linz Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-04-12 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Jennifer N Miller; Paula Schulz; Bunny Pozehl; Douglas Fiedler; Alissa Fial; Ann M Berger Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 2.816
Authors: Zbigniew L Topor; John E Remmers; Joshua Grosse; Erin V Mosca; Seyed A Zareian Jahromi; Yingyu Zhu; Sabina Bruehlmann Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Ulysses J Magalang; Erna S Arnardottir; Ning-Hung Chen; Peter A Cistulli; Thorarinn Gíslason; Diane Lim; Thomas Penzel; Richard Schwab; Sergio Tufik; Allan I Pack Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Clara Mosquera-Lopez; Joseph Leitschuh; John Condon; Chad C Hagen; Cody Hanks; Peter G Jacobs Journal: Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc Date: 2018-07