Susana Vacas1, Erin McInrue, Michael A Gropper, Mervyn Maze, Rochelle Zak, Eunjung Lim, Jacqueline M Leung. 1. From the Departments of *Anesthesia and Perioperative Care and †Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California; and ‡Office of Biostatistics & Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Hawaii John A. Burns School of Medicine, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep disruption in critically ill adults can result in acute decrements in cognitive function, including delirium, but it is underdiagnosed in the setting of the intensive care unit (ICU). Although sleep stages can be assessed by polysomnography (PSG), acquisition and interpretation of PSG is costly, is labor intensive, is difficult to do over an extended period of time with critically ill patients (multiple days of continuous recording), and may interfere with patient care. In this pilot study, we investigated the feasibility and utility of monitoring sleep in the ICU setting using a portable electroencephalography (EEG) monitor, the SedLine brain monitor. METHODS: We first performed a baseline comparison study of the SedLine brain monitor by comparing its recordings to PSG recorded in a sleep laboratory (n = 3). In a separate patient cohort, we enrolled patients in the ICU who were monitored continuously with the SedLine monitor for sleep disruption (n = 23). In all enrolled patients, we continuously monitored their EEG. The raw EEG was retrieved and sleep stages and arousals were analyzed by a board-certified technologist. Delirium was measured by a trained research nurse using the Confusion Assessment Method developed for the ICU. RESULTS: For all enrolled patients, we continuously monitored their EEGs and were able to retrieve the raw EEGs for analysis of sleep stages. Overall, the SedLine brain monitor was able to differentiate sleep stages, as well as capture arousals and transitions between sleep stages compared with the PSG performed in the sleep laboratory. The percentage agreement was 67% for the wake stage, 77% for the non-rapid eye movement (REM) stage (N1 = 29%, N2 = 88%, and N3 = 6%), and 89% for the REM stage. The overall agreement was measured with the use of weighted kappa, which was 0.61, 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.64. In the ICU study, the mean recording time for the 23 enrolled patients was 19.10 hours. There were several signs indicative of poor-quality sleep, where sleep was distributed throughout the day, with reduced time spent in REM (1.38% ± 2.74% of total sleep time), and stage N3 (2.17% ± 5.53% of total sleep time) coupled with a high arousal index (34.63 ± 19.04 arousals per hour). The occurrence of ICU delirium was not significantly different between patients with and without sleep disruption. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest the utility of a portable EEG monitor to measure different sleep stages, transitions, and arousals; however, the accuracy in measuring different sleep stages by the SedLine monitor varies compared with PSG. Our results also support previous findings that sleep is fragmented in critically ill patients. Further research is necessary to develop portable EEG monitors that have higher agreement with PSG.
BACKGROUND:Sleep disruption in critically ill adults can result in acute decrements in cognitive function, including delirium, but it is underdiagnosed in the setting of the intensive care unit (ICU). Although sleep stages can be assessed by polysomnography (PSG), acquisition and interpretation of PSG is costly, is labor intensive, is difficult to do over an extended period of time with critically illpatients (multiple days of continuous recording), and may interfere with patient care. In this pilot study, we investigated the feasibility and utility of monitoring sleep in the ICU setting using a portable electroencephalography (EEG) monitor, the SedLine brain monitor. METHODS: We first performed a baseline comparison study of the SedLine brain monitor by comparing its recordings to PSG recorded in a sleep laboratory (n = 3). In a separate patient cohort, we enrolled patients in the ICU who were monitored continuously with the SedLine monitor for sleep disruption (n = 23). In all enrolled patients, we continuously monitored their EEG. The raw EEG was retrieved and sleep stages and arousals were analyzed by a board-certified technologist. Delirium was measured by a trained research nurse using the Confusion Assessment Method developed for the ICU. RESULTS: For all enrolled patients, we continuously monitored their EEGs and were able to retrieve the raw EEGs for analysis of sleep stages. Overall, the SedLine brain monitor was able to differentiate sleep stages, as well as capture arousals and transitions between sleep stages compared with the PSG performed in the sleep laboratory. The percentage agreement was 67% for the wake stage, 77% for the non-rapid eye movement (REM) stage (N1 = 29%, N2 = 88%, and N3 = 6%), and 89% for the REM stage. The overall agreement was measured with the use of weighted kappa, which was 0.61, 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.64. In the ICU study, the mean recording time for the 23 enrolled patients was 19.10 hours. There were several signs indicative of poor-quality sleep, where sleep was distributed throughout the day, with reduced time spent in REM (1.38% ± 2.74% of total sleep time), and stage N3 (2.17% ± 5.53% of total sleep time) coupled with a high arousal index (34.63 ± 19.04 arousals per hour). The occurrence of ICU delirium was not significantly different between patients with and without sleep disruption. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest the utility of a portable EEG monitor to measure different sleep stages, transitions, and arousals; however, the accuracy in measuring different sleep stages by the SedLine monitor varies compared with PSG. Our results also support previous findings that sleep is fragmented in critically illpatients. Further research is necessary to develop portable EEG monitors that have higher agreement with PSG.
Authors: H Viertiö-Oja; V Maja; M Särkelä; P Talja; N Tenkanen; H Tolvanen-Laakso; M Paloheimo; A Vakkuri; A Yli-Hankala; P Meriläinen Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 2.105
Authors: Xu Zhong; H John Hilton; Gregory J Gates; Sanja Jelic; Yaakov Stern; Matthew N Bartels; Ronald E Demeersman; Robert C Basner Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2005-02-17
Authors: E W Ely; S K Inouye; G R Bernard; S Gordon; J Francis; L May; B Truman; T Speroff; S Gautam; R Margolin; R P Hart; R Dittus Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-12-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lynn McNicoll; Margaret A Pisani; Ying Zhang; E Wesley Ely; Mark D Siegel; Sharon K Inouye Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Frank A Rasulo; Philip Hopkins; Francisco A Lobo; Pierre Pandin; Basil Matta; Carla Carozzi; Stefano Romagnoli; Anthony Absalom; Rafael Badenes; Thomas Bleck; Anselmo Caricato; Jan Claassen; André Denault; Cristina Honorato; Saba Motta; Geert Meyfroidt; Finn Michael Radtke; Zaccaria Ricci; Chiara Robba; Fabio S Taccone; Paul Vespa; Ida Nardiello; Massimo Lamperti Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2022-07-27 Impact factor: 3.532
Authors: Armin Niklas Flinspach; Sebastian Zinn; Kai Zacharowski; Ümniye Balaban; Eva Herrmann; Elisabeth Hannah Adam Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Sadaf Farasat; Jennifer J Dorsch; Alex K Pearce; Alison A Moore; Jennifer L Martin; Atul Malhotra; Biren B Kamdar Journal: Curr Sleep Med Rep Date: 2020-07-27
Authors: Jennifer J Dorsch; Jennifer L Martin; Atul Malhotra; Robert L Owens; Biren B Kamdar Journal: Semin Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 3.119
Authors: Omid Azimaraghi; Maximilian Hammer; Peter Santer; Katharina Platzbecker; Friederike C Althoff; Maria Patrocinio; Stephanie D Grabitz; Karuna Wongtangman; Sandra Rumyantsev; Xinling Xu; Maximilian S Schaefer; Patrick M Fuller; Balachundhar Subramaniam; Matthias Eikermann Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-07-19 Impact factor: 2.692