论文已发表
提 交 论 文
注册即可获取Ebpay生命的最新动态
注 册
IF 收录期刊
四种用于识别失眠患者中阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停的筛查工具的性能
Authors Shi C, Wang Y , Luo J , Huang R , Xiao Y
Received 5 September 2024
Accepted for publication 17 February 2025
Published 3 March 2025 Volume 2025:17 Pages 379—390
DOI http://doi.org/10.2147/NSS.S494804
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Prof. Dr. Ahmed BaHammam
Chuan Shi,* Yuxin Wang,* Jinmei Luo, Rong Huang, Yi Xiao
Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, 100730, People’s Republic of China
*These authors contributed equally to this work
Correspondence: Jinmei Luo, Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, 100730, People’s Republic of China, Email palmljm@126.com
Purpose: Co-morbid insomnia and sleep apnea are common in clinical practice. The existing OSA screening tools have not been fully validated in insomnia populations, and items measuring daytime function may be interfered with the presence of insomnia. This study aims to validate the performance of four commonly used OSA screening tools among individuals with and without insomnia.
Participants and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in individuals with suspected OSA referred for sleep studies from December 2021 to December 2023. All participants completed the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) scale, STOP-Bang, Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Berlin questionnaire, and NoSAS score. Clinical insomnia was defined as an ISI of 15 or more. Performance of screening tools was primarily assessed by sensitivity, specificity, and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Results: A total of 1266 participants (26% females, age 46.4 ± 12.4 years) were included in the study. The prevalence of apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 15/h was 48% and 52% in the insomnia (n=313) and non-insomnia (n=953) group, respectively (P> 0.05). In presence of insomnia, the STOP-Bang, ESS, and Berlin questionnaire demonstrated higher sensitivity but lower specificity. Using conventional cutoffs, the STOP-Bang had the highest level of sensitivity (93.2%, 95% CI 87.6– 96.5%), while NoSAS had the highest level of specificity (67.7%, 95% CI 59.9– 74.6%) for identifying AHI ≥ 15/h. The STOP-Bang and NoSAS outperformed ESS and Berlin with areas under the ROC curve > 0.7 at all levels of OSA severity. The Youden’s index was maximized at score 4 for STOP-Bang and score 7 for NoSAS.
Conclusion: The performance of OSA screening tools incorporating evaluation of daytime function is altered in the presence of insomnia. Under conventional cutoffs, STOP-Bang is the preferred screening tool due to its high sensitivity.
Keywords: obstructive sleep apnea, insomnia, screening instruments, polysomnography