0486 Comparing Three Home Sleep Apnea Testing Devices to Polysomnography: Assessing Respiratory, Sleep-Wake, and Body Position Data. (27th April 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Arguelles, J; Becker, K; Kim, J; Chang, J; Montoya, E; Dewitte, J; Villalpando, C; Woodrum, R; Henry, L; Takehara, J; Hwang, D
• Is Part Of: Sleep. Volume 41(2018)Supplement 1
• Page Start: A183
• Page End: A183
• Publication Date: 2018-04-27
• Subjects: Sleep -- Physiological aspects -- Periodicals; Sleep disorders -- Periodicals; Sommeil -- Aspect physiologique -- Périodiques; Sommeil, Troubles du -- Périodiques; Sleep disorders; Sleep -- Physiological aspects; Sleep -- physiological aspects; Sleep Wake Disorders; Psychophysiology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.8498
• DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsy061.485
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0161-8105

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: We previously reported excellent agreement between REI4% and AHI4% when comparing 3 Home Sleep Apnea Testing(HSAT) devices with PSG for the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea(OSA). This study compares other reported sleep testing metrics including alternative respiratory metrics and sleep-wake data. Methods: Patients were eligible if referred to Kaiser Permanente Sleep Center(Fontana, CA) for suspected OSA and HSAT-appropriate. Participants wore three HSAT devices simultaneously for three nights: Device "A"(ARES; SleepMed, Inc); Device "N"(Nox T-3; Nox Medical); Device "W"(WatchPAT, Itamar Medical). Nights 1(N1) and 2(N2) were performed at home; Night 3(N3) was performed simultaneously with PSG. Comparison of respiratory, sleep-wake and position metrics was performed for N3. Other analyses based on N1 and N2 are reported separately. Results: 60(30 men, 30 women; 46.4 ± 11.8 years) patients enrolled; 57 completed N3 testing with PSG. Respiratory: REI4% vs AHI4% showed excellent agreements(reported as R, P value; Bland-Altman mean difference, 2SD): "A"(0.97, p<0.01; -3.53, 19.0), "N"(0.96, p<0.01; 0.62, 18.7), "W"(0.93, p<0.01; -3.8, 30.0). RDI showed good correlations, but HSAT trended lower compared to PSG: "A"(0.91, p<0.01; -16.1, 34.8), "W"(0.91, p<0.01; -21.0, 37.9)--"N" does not report RDI. REI3% vs AHI(AASM) was compared for a limited cohort and showed excellent agreements: "A"(0.97, p<0.01; -6.4, 23.6), "N"(0.99, p<0.01; -1.9, 21.7). "W" REI3% was not analyzed due to data loss. Oximetry: Correlation was good to excellent for ODI, T90%, and Min Sat(R-ODI, R-T90%, R-Min Sat): "W"(0.93, 0.79, 0.98); "N"(0.99, 0.80, 0.92); "A"(does not report ODI, 0.68, 0.77). All correlations had p<0.01. Sleep-wake: "W" performed the best although overall correlations(R-TST, R-sleep efficiency, R-%REM) were weaker than respiratory comparisons: "A"(0.57, 0.62, 0.02); "N"(0.64, 0.09, does not report REM); "W"(0.71, 0.84, 0.53). All correlations were statistically significant except values <0.10. Body Position: "N" displayed strongest agreement for non-supine% and non-supine AHI: "A"(0.75, 0.92); "N"(0.85, 0.94); "W"(0.62, 0.67). All p<0.01. Conclusion: Different HSAT technologies demonstrated good agreement across various metrics with PSG, particularly for respiratory and oximetry data. HSAT can be reliably utilized for the evaluation of OSA. Support (If Any): None.