Kim L Ward1,2, Nigel McArdle2,3, Alan James2,3,4, Alexandra P Bremner1, Laila Simpson5, Matthew N Cooper6, Lyle J Palmer7, Annette C Fedson8, Sutapa Mukherjee2, David R Hillman2,3. 1. School of Population Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 2. Western Australian Sleep Disorders Research Institute, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, Perth, Australia. 3. Department of Pulmonary Physiology and Sleep Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Australia. 4. School of Medicine and Pharmacology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 5. School of Anatomy and Human Biology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 6. Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia, Subiaco, Australia. 7. The Joanna Briggs Institute and School of Translational Health Science, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. 8. Center for Sleep and Circadian Neurobiology, University of Pennsylvania, PA.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that a dual-channel portable monitor (PM) device could accurately identify patients who have a high pretest probability of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), and we evaluated factors that may contribute to variability between PM and polysomnography (PSG) results. METHODS:Consecutive clinic patients (N = 104) with possible OSA completed a home PM study, a PM study simultaneous with laboratory PSG, and a second home PM study. Uniform data analysis methods were applied to both PM and PSG data. Primary outcomes of interest were the positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and sensitivity of the PM device to "rule-in" OSA, defined as an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 5 events/h on PSG. Effects of different test environment and study nights, and order of study and analysis methods (manual compared to automated) on PM diagnostic accuracy were assessed. RESULTS: The PM has adequate LR+ (4.8), sensitivity (80%), and specificity (83%) for detecting OSA in the unattended home setting when benchmarked against laboratory PSG, with better LR+ (> 5) and specificity (100%) and unchanged sensitivity (80%) in the simultaneous laboratory comparison. There were no significant night-night (all p > 0.10) or study order effects (home or laboratory first, p = 0.08) on AHI measures. Manual PM data review improved case finding accuracy, although this was not statistically significant (all p > 0.07). Misclassification was more frequent where OSA was mild. CONCLUSIONS: Overall performance of the PM device is consistent with current recommended criteria for an "acceptable" device to confidently "rule-in" OSA (AHI ≥ 5 events/h) in a high pretest probability clinic population. Our data support the utility of simple two-channel diagnostic devices to confirm the diagnosis of OSA in the home environment. COMMENTARY: A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 411.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that a dual-channel portable monitor (PM) device could accurately identify patients who have a high pretest probability of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), and we evaluated factors that may contribute to variability between PM and polysomnography (PSG) results. METHODS: Consecutive clinic patients (N = 104) with possible OSA completed a home PM study, a PM study simultaneous with laboratory PSG, and a second home PM study. Uniform data analysis methods were applied to both PM and PSG data. Primary outcomes of interest were the positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and sensitivity of the PM device to "rule-in" OSA, defined as an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 5 events/h on PSG. Effects of different test environment and study nights, and order of study and analysis methods (manual compared to automated) on PM diagnostic accuracy were assessed. RESULTS: The PM has adequate LR+ (4.8), sensitivity (80%), and specificity (83%) for detecting OSA in the unattended home setting when benchmarked against laboratory PSG, with better LR+ (> 5) and specificity (100%) and unchanged sensitivity (80%) in the simultaneous laboratory comparison. There were no significant night-night (all p > 0.10) or study order effects (home or laboratory first, p = 0.08) on AHI measures. Manual PM data review improved case finding accuracy, although this was not statistically significant (all p > 0.07). Misclassification was more frequent where OSA was mild. CONCLUSIONS: Overall performance of the PM device is consistent with current recommended criteria for an "acceptable" device to confidently "rule-in" OSA (AHI ≥ 5 events/h) in a high pretest probability clinic population. Our data support the utility of simple two-channel diagnostic devices to confirm the diagnosis of OSA in the home environment. COMMENTARY: A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 411.
Authors: Virend K Somers; David P White; Raouf Amin; William T Abraham; Fernando Costa; Antonio Culebras; Stephen Daniels; John S Floras; Carl E Hunt; Lyle J Olson; Thomas G Pickering; Richard Russell; Mary Woo; Terry Young Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-08-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Lawrence J Epstein; David Kristo; Patrick J Strollo; Norman Friedman; Atul Malhotra; Susheel P Patil; Kannan Ramar; Robert Rogers; Richard J Schwab; Edward M Weaver; Michael D Weinstein Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Hui Chen; Alan A Lowe; Yuxing Bai; Peter Hamilton; John A Fleetham; Fernanda R Almeida Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2008-12-04 Impact factor: 2.816
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: Yvonne Ng; Simon A Joosten; Bradley A Edwards; Anthony Turton; Helen Romios; Thilini Samarasinghe; Shane Landry; Darren R Mansfield; Garun S Hamilton Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2017-04-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Vishesh K Kapur; Dennis H Auckley; Susmita Chowdhuri; David C Kuhlmann; Reena Mehra; Kannan Ramar; Christopher G Harrod Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Jordan Cunningham; Michael Hunter; Charley Budgeon; Kevin Murray; Matthew Knuiman; Jennie Hui; David Hillman; Bhajan Singh; Alan James Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 4.324