Wenjing Wang1, Shan Yuan2, Jehane Michael Le Grange1, Haiying Zheng1, Tianci Yao3, Wei Peng4, Jinnong Zhang5. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430022, China. 3. Department of Emergency Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China. 4. Salt Lake Regional Medical Center, Heart and Lung Institute of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China. zhangjnwhhb@163.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A comparison of all scoring systems used for screening for obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) is lacking. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the performance of five scoring systems for screening for OSAHS, as well as to validate the use of the NoSAS and SACS in the Chinese population. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from hospital-based, manned, overnight sleep monitoring studies for 105 consecutive outpatients using a portable monitor (PM) device. RESULTS: The 105 participants had an average age of 46 years and were mostly men (75%). STOP-Bang, SACS, and NoSAS scoring exhibited moderate predictive values at different AHI cutoffs (AUC 0.761-0.853, 0.722-0.854, and 0.724-0.771 respectively), followed by the STOP and Berlin questionnaire (AUC 0.680-0.781vs 0.624-0.724). Both STOP-Bang and SACS showed excellent sensitivity (89.5-100% vs 93.4-94.6%) and negative predictive value (68-100% vs 77.3-90.9%), while STOP-Bang, STOP, and SACS showed low negative likelihood ratios (- LR) (0-0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicated that the STOP-Bang questionnaire and the SACS both show better predictive value than other scoring systems among the five screening tools for OSAHS. Both scoring systems are simple and easy to implement for screening for OSAHS in the community and in hospitals.
PURPOSE: A comparison of all scoring systems used for screening for obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) is lacking. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the performance of five scoring systems for screening for OSAHS, as well as to validate the use of the NoSAS and SACS in the Chinese population. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from hospital-based, manned, overnight sleep monitoring studies for 105 consecutive outpatients using a portable monitor (PM) device. RESULTS: The 105 participants had an average age of 46 years and were mostly men (75%). STOP-Bang, SACS, and NoSAS scoring exhibited moderate predictive values at different AHI cutoffs (AUC 0.761-0.853, 0.722-0.854, and 0.724-0.771 respectively), followed by the STOP and Berlin questionnaire (AUC 0.680-0.781vs 0.624-0.724). Both STOP-Bang and SACS showed excellent sensitivity (89.5-100% vs 93.4-94.6%) and negative predictive value (68-100% vs 77.3-90.9%), while STOP-Bang, STOP, and SACS showed low negative likelihood ratios (- LR) (0-0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicated that the STOP-Bang questionnaire and the SACS both show better predictive value than other scoring systems among the five screening tools for OSAHS. Both scoring systems are simple and easy to implement for screening for OSAHS in the community and in hospitals.
Authors: Robert A Dias; Kimberly A Hardin; Heather Rose; Mark A Agius; Michelle L Apperson; Steven D Brass Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2012-01-21 Impact factor: 2.816
Authors: Adeline Tan; Yueheng Hong; Linda W L Tan; Rob M van Dam; Yan Yi Cheung; Chi-Hang Lee Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2017-01-07 Impact factor: 2.816
Authors: Tetyana Kendzerska; Andrea S Gershon; Gillian Hawker; George Tomlinson; Richard S Leung Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2014-07-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Raman K Malhotra; Douglas B Kirsch; David A Kristo; Eric J Olson; Rashmi N Aurora; Kelly A Carden; Ronald D Chervin; Jennifer L Martin; Kannan Ramar; Carol L Rosen; James A Rowley; Ilene M Rosen Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2018-07-15 Impact factor: 4.062