Detecting sleep apnoea syndrome in primary care with screening questionnaires and the Epworth sleepiness scale

CV Senaratna, JL Perret, A Lowe… - Medical journal of …, 2019 - Wiley Online Library
CV Senaratna, JL Perret, A Lowe, G Bowatte, MJ Abramson, B Thompson, C Lodge…
Medical journal of Australia, 2019Wiley Online Library
Objective To examine the utility of apnoea screening questionnaires, alone and in
combination with the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), for detecting obstructive sleep
apnoea (OSA) in primary care. Design, setting Prospective validation study in an Australian
general population cohort. Participants 424 of 772 randomly invited Tasmanian Longitudinal
Health Study, 6th decade follow‐up participants with OSA symptoms (mean age, 52.9 years;
SD, 0.9 year) who completed OSA screening questionnaires and underwent type 4 sleep …
Objective
To examine the utility of apnoea screening questionnaires, alone and in combination with the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), for detecting obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) in primary care.
Design, setting
Prospective validation study in an Australian general population cohort.
Participants
424 of 772 randomly invited Tasmanian Longitudinal Health Study, 6th decade follow‐up participants with OSA symptoms (mean age, 52.9 years; SD, 0.9 year) who completed OSA screening questionnaires and underwent type 4 sleep studies.
Main outcome measures
Clinically relevant OSA, defined as moderate to severe OSA (15 or more oxygen desaturation events/hour), or mild OSA (5–14 events/hour) and excessive daytime sleepiness (ESS ≥ 8); diagnostic test properties of the Berlin (BQ), STOP‐Bang and OSA‐50 questionnaires, alone or combined with an ESS ≥ 8.
Results
STOP‐Bang and OSA‐50 correctly identified most participants with clinically relevant OSA (sensitivity, 81% and 86% respectively), but with poor specificity (36% and 21% respectively); the specificity (59%) and sensitivity of the BQ (65%) were both low. When combined with the criterion ESS ≥ 8, the specificity of each questionnaire was high (94–96%), but sensitivity was low (36–51%). Sensitivity and specificity could be adjusted according to specific needs by varying the STOP‐Bang cut‐off score when combined with the ESS ≥ 8 criterion.
Conclusions
For people likely to trigger OSA assessment in primary care, the STOP‐Bang, BQ, and OSA‐50 questionnaires, combined with the ESS, can be used to rule in, but not to rule out clinically relevant OSA. Combined use of the STOP‐Bang with different cut‐off scores and the ESS facilitates a flexible balance between sensitivity and specificity.
Wiley Online Library
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果