Jin Mou1, Bethann M Pflugeisen2, Brian A Crick3, Paul J Amoroso2, Kirk T Harmon4, Stephen F Tarnoczy5, S Shirley Ho5, Kimberly A Mebust5. 1. MultiCare Institute for Research & Innovation, MultiCare Health System, Ste 402, 314 MLK Jr. Way, Tacoma, WA, 98405, USA. jin.mou@multicare.org. 2. MultiCare Institute for Research & Innovation, MultiCare Health System, Ste 402, 314 MLK Jr. Way, Tacoma, WA, 98405, USA. 3. Pulse Heart Institute, MultiCare Health System, Tacoma, WA, 98405, USA. 4. MultiCare Centers of Occupational Medicine, Fife, WA, 98424, USA. 5. MultiCare Sleep Medicine Center, MultiCare Neuroscience Center of Washington, Tacoma, WA, 98405, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is the most commonly seen clinical sleep disorder. STOP-Bang, a widely used screening tool, yields a composite score based on eight dichotomized items including male gender. This study was designed to validate STOP-Bang among clinically referred patients and tested alternative scoring designs on tool performance, with a focus on gender differences in OSA. METHOD: STOP-Bang was administered to 403 female and 532 male subjects, followed by comprehensive sleep evaluation that included measurement of apnea-hypopnea indexes. Gender differences in STOP-Bang scores, OSA diagnosis, and severities were explored, and gender-specific alternative score cutoffs evaluated. Optimal operating points (OOP) were tested for female body mass index (BMI) and male neck circumference to inform STOP-Bang threshold refinement. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to compare conventional and modified STOP-Bang. RESULTS: STOP-Bang performance by gender showed extremely low specificity in males at the recommended cutoff of ≥3. Better utility was presented at a cutoff of 4 or 5 among clinically referred patients irrespective of gender differences. Screening performance was improved by modifying BMI and/or neck circumference thresholds using gender-triaged OOP estimation. Three gender-based model revisions outperformed conventional STOP-Bang. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that gender-specific consideration needs to be incorporated into the application of STOP-Bang in a clinically referred patient population with a higher risk of OSA. Alternative scoring systems may improve predictive performance of STOP-Bang.
PURPOSE:Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is the most commonly seen clinical sleep disorder. STOP-Bang, a widely used screening tool, yields a composite score based on eight dichotomized items including male gender. This study was designed to validate STOP-Bang among clinically referred patients and tested alternative scoring designs on tool performance, with a focus on gender differences in OSA. METHOD: STOP-Bang was administered to 403 female and 532 male subjects, followed by comprehensive sleep evaluation that included measurement of apnea-hypopnea indexes. Gender differences in STOP-Bang scores, OSA diagnosis, and severities were explored, and gender-specific alternative score cutoffs evaluated. Optimal operating points (OOP) were tested for female body mass index (BMI) and male neck circumference to inform STOP-Bang threshold refinement. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to compare conventional and modified STOP-Bang. RESULTS: STOP-Bang performance by gender showed extremely low specificity in males at the recommended cutoff of ≥3. Better utility was presented at a cutoff of 4 or 5 among clinically referred patients irrespective of gender differences. Screening performance was improved by modifying BMI and/or neck circumference thresholds using gender-triaged OOP estimation. Three gender-based model revisions outperformed conventional STOP-Bang. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that gender-specific consideration needs to be incorporated into the application of STOP-Bang in a clinically referred patient population with a higher risk of OSA. Alternative scoring systems may improve predictive performance of STOP-Bang.
Authors: H Klar Yaggi; John Concato; Walter N Kernan; Judith H Lichtman; Lawrence M Brass; Vahid Mohsenin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-11-10 Impact factor: 91.245
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: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ji Ho Choi; Eun Joong Kim; Yang Soo Kim; June Choi; Tae Hoon Kim; Soon Young Kwon; Heung Man Lee; Sang Hag Lee; Chol Shin; Seung Hoon Lee Journal: Acta Otolaryngol Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 1.494
Authors: Cinthya A Pena Orbea; Robin M Lloyd; Stephanie S Faubion; Virginia M Miller; Kristin C Mara; Ekta Kapoor Journal: Maturitas Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 4.342