STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine if signals generated by a new sleep monitor (Prodigy) are comparable to signals generated during in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG). METHODS: Fifty-nine patients with various sleep disorders (25 with moderate/severe sleep apnea) were studied. Full PSG was performed using standard acquisition systems. Prodigy was attached to the forehead with four disposable snap electrodes. Four additional electrodes were attached to monitor eye movements and muscle activity, and to serve as reference (mastoid). One frontal EEG signal was outputted in real time from the monitor and stored in the PSG record along with the other PSG signals. PSG was scored for sleep variables manually, and monitor records were scored by a validated automatic system (MSS) (MSS-Prodigy). MSS-Prodigy was briefly edited following suggestions of an Editing Helper feature of MSS. RESULTS: Technical failures resulted in one study being unusable and another with data for only 3 hours. Prodigy EEG signal stored in the PSG record was visually indistinguishable from the PSG-derived EEG signals. Important differences between manual scores and unedited MSS-Prodigy were seen in a few patients in some sleep variables (notably onset latencies and REM time). Editing Helper issued 2.1 ± 0.8 suggestions/file. Only these suggestions were pursued during editing. Intraclass correlation coefficients for manual vs. edited MSS-Prodigy were > 0.83 for all sleep variables except for stages N1 and N3 (0.57 and 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: When scored with MSS, and with only very minor editing, the monitor's results show excellent agreement with manual scoring of polysomnography data, even in patients with severe sleep disorders.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine if signals generated by a new sleep monitor (Prodigy) are comparable to signals generated during in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG). METHODS: Fifty-nine patients with various sleep disorders (25 with moderate/severe sleep apnea) were studied. Full PSG was performed using standard acquisition systems. Prodigy was attached to the forehead with four disposable snap electrodes. Four additional electrodes were attached to monitor eye movements and muscle activity, and to serve as reference (mastoid). One frontal EEG signal was outputted in real time from the monitor and stored in the PSG record along with the other PSG signals. PSG was scored for sleep variables manually, and monitor records were scored by a validated automatic system (MSS) (MSS-Prodigy). MSS-Prodigy was briefly edited following suggestions of an Editing Helper feature of MSS. RESULTS: Technical failures resulted in one study being unusable and another with data for only 3 hours. Prodigy EEG signal stored in the PSG record was visually indistinguishable from the PSG-derived EEG signals. Important differences between manual scores and unedited MSS-Prodigy were seen in a few patients in some sleep variables (notably onset latencies and REM time). Editing Helper issued 2.1 ± 0.8 suggestions/file. Only these suggestions were pursued during editing. Intraclass correlation coefficients for manual vs. edited MSS-Prodigy were > 0.83 for all sleep variables except for stages N1 and N3 (0.57 and 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: When scored with MSS, and with only very minor editing, the monitor's results show excellent agreement with manual scoring of polysomnography data, even in patients with severe sleep disorders.
Authors: Atul Malhotra; Magdy Younes; Samuel T Kuna; Ruth Benca; Clete A Kushida; James Walsh; Alexandra Hanlon; Bethany Staley; Allan I Pack; Grace W Pien Journal: Sleep Date: 2013-04-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Xiaozhe Zhang; Xiaosong Dong; Jan W Kantelhardt; Jing Li; Long Zhao; Carmen Garcia; Martin Glos; Thomas Penzel; Fang Han Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 2.816
Authors: Heidi Danker-Hopfe; D Kunz; G Gruber; G Klösch; J L Lorenzo; S L Himanen; B Kemp; T Penzel; J Röschke; H Dorn; A Schlögl; E Trenker; G Dorffner Journal: J Sleep Res Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 3.981
Authors: Magdy Younes; Samuel T Kuna; Allan I Pack; James K Walsh; Clete A Kushida; Bethany Staley; Grace W Pien Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Daniel J Levendowski; Luigi Ferini-Strambi; Charlene Gamaldo; Mindy Cetel; Robert Rosenberg; Philip R Westbrook Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2017-06-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Scott J Fatt; Jessica E Beilharz; Michael Joubert; Chloe Wilson; Andrew R Lloyd; Uté Vollmer-Conna; Erin Cvejic Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2019-11-27 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Annette Sterr; James K Ebajemito; Kaare B Mikkelsen; Maria A Bonmati-Carrion; Nayantara Santhi; Ciro Della Monica; Lucinda Grainger; Giuseppe Atzori; Victoria Revell; Stefan Debener; Derk-Jan Dijk; Maarten DeVos Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Magdy Younes; Bethany Gerardy; Allan I Pack; Samuel T Kuna; Cecilia Castro-Diehl; Susan Redline Journal: Sleep Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 6.313