Yanxia Xu1,2, Qiong Ou3, Yilu Cheng1,2, Miaochan Lao2, Guo Pei1,2. 1. School of Medicine, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510006, China. 2. Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangdong Provincial Geriatrics Institute, Guangzhou, 510080, China. 3. Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangdong Provincial Geriatrics Institute, Guangzhou, 510080, China. ouqiong2776@hotmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Due to the lack of an objective population-based screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), a large number of patients with potential OSA have not been identified in the general population. Our study compared an objective wearable sleep monitoring device with polysomnography (PSG) to provide a reference for OSA screening in a large population. METHODS: Using a self-control method, patients admitted to our sleep center from July 2020 to March 2021 were selected for overnight PSG and wearable intelligent sleep monitor (WISM) at the same time. The sensitivity and specificity of the device for the diagnosis of OSA were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 196 participants (mean age: 45.1 ± 12.3 years [18-80 years]; 168 men [86%]) completed both PSG and WISM monitoring. Using an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 5 events/h as the diagnostic criterion, the sensitivity, specificity, kappa value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the WISM for OSA diagnosis were 93%, 77%, 0.6, and 0.95, respectively. Using an AHI ≥ 15 events/h as the diagnostic criterion for moderate-to-severe OSA, these values were 92%, 89%, 0.8, and 0.95, respectively. The mean difference in the AHI between PSG and the artificial intelligence oxygen desaturation index from the WISM was 6.8 events/h (95% confidence interval: - 13.1 to 26.7). CONCLUSION: Compared with the PSG, WISM exhibits good sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of OSA. This small, simple, and easy-to-use device is more suitable for OSA screening in a large population because of its single-step application procedure.
PURPOSE: Due to the lack of an objective population-based screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), a large number of patients with potential OSA have not been identified in the general population. Our study compared an objective wearable sleep monitoring device with polysomnography (PSG) to provide a reference for OSA screening in a large population. METHODS: Using a self-control method, patients admitted to our sleep center from July 2020 to March 2021 were selected for overnight PSG and wearable intelligent sleep monitor (WISM) at the same time. The sensitivity and specificity of the device for the diagnosis of OSA were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 196 participants (mean age: 45.1 ± 12.3 years [18-80 years]; 168 men [86%]) completed both PSG and WISM monitoring. Using an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 5 events/h as the diagnostic criterion, the sensitivity, specificity, kappa value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the WISM for OSA diagnosis were 93%, 77%, 0.6, and 0.95, respectively. Using an AHI ≥ 15 events/h as the diagnostic criterion for moderate-to-severe OSA, these values were 92%, 89%, 0.8, and 0.95, respectively. The mean difference in the AHI between PSG and the artificial intelligence oxygen desaturation index from the WISM was 6.8 events/h (95% confidence interval: - 13.1 to 26.7). CONCLUSION: Compared with the PSG, WISM exhibits good sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of OSA. This small, simple, and easy-to-use device is more suitable for OSA screening in a large population because of its single-step application procedure.
Authors: Adam V Benjafield; Najib T Ayas; Peter R Eastwood; Raphael Heinzer; Mary S M Ip; Mary J Morrell; Carlos M Nunez; Sanjay R Patel; Thomas Penzel; Jean-Louis Pépin; Paul E Peppard; Sanjeev Sinha; Sergio Tufik; Kate Valentine; Atul Malhotra Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: R Doug McEvoy; Nick A Antic; Emma Heeley; Yuanming Luo; Qiong Ou; Xilong Zhang; Olga Mediano; Rui Chen; Luciano F Drager; Zhihong Liu; Guofang Chen; Baoliang Du; Nigel McArdle; Sutapa Mukherjee; Manjari Tripathi; Laurent Billot; Qiang Li; Geraldo Lorenzi-Filho; Ferran Barbe; Susan Redline; Jiguang Wang; Hisatomi Arima; Bruce Neal; David P White; Ron R Grunstein; Nanshan Zhong; Craig S Anderson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-08-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Chamara V Senaratna; Jennifer L Perret; Caroline J Lodge; Adrian J Lowe; Brittany E Campbell; Melanie C Matheson; Garun S Hamilton; Shyamali C Dharmage Journal: Sleep Med Rev Date: 2016-07-18 Impact factor: 11.609
Authors: Apoor S Gami; Eric J Olson; Win K Shen; R Scott Wright; Karla V Ballman; Dave O Hodge; Regina M Herges; Daniel E Howard; Virend K Somers Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-06-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: M Lamberts; O W Nielsen; G Y H Lip; M H Ruwald; C B Christiansen; S L Kristensen; C Torp-Pedersen; M L Hansen; G H Gislason Journal: J Intern Med Date: 2014-09-17 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Terry Young; Laurel Finn; Paul E Peppard; Mariana Szklo-Coxe; Diane Austin; F Javier Nieto; Robin Stubbs; K Mae Hla Journal: Sleep Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 5.849