Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2025
"The M-APNE score: an objective screening tool for OSA highlighting the area under the inspiratory flow-volume curve".
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Satici Celal, Azakli Damla, Sokucu Sinem Nedime, Aydin Senay, Atasever Furkan, Ozdemir Cengiz
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Polysomnography (PSG) is resource-intensive but remains the gold standard for diagnosing Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA). We aimed to develop a screening tool to better allocate resources by identifying individuals at higher risk for OSA, overcoming limitations of current tools that may under-diagnose based on self-reported symptoms.
METHODS: A total of 884 patients (490 diagnosed with OSA) were included, which was divided into the training, validation, and test sets. Using multivariate logistic regression analyses, we developed a scoring system incorporating male sex, age, sawtooth pattern, area under the inspiratory flow-volume curve (AreaFI), and neck circumference to objectively identify patients at higher risk of OSA. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) metrics. The M-APNE Score was compared to other non-symptom-based tools, the No-Apnea Score and the Symptomless Multivariable Apnea Prediction (sMVAP) model, using the Delong test.
RESULTS: The M-APNE Score showed sensitivity rates of 79.3% in the training set, 70.8% in the test, and 80% in the validation set. ROC analysis for M-APNE score yielded AUCs of 0.82 in the training, 0.76 in the test, 0.82 in the validation set. The discriminative accuracy of M-APNE Score were found to be better than the No-Apnea Score (AUC = 0.82 vs. 0.76, p < 0.001) and the sMVAP (AUC = 0.82 vs. 0.75, p = 0.001) in the training set. Hosmer Lemeshow test indicated good calibration for M-Apne Score (p = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS: The M-APNE Score is a robust and objective tool for OSA screening, potentially reducing classification errors and improving accuracy.
METHODS: A total of 884 patients (490 diagnosed with OSA) were included, which was divided into the training, validation, and test sets. Using multivariate logistic regression analyses, we developed a scoring system incorporating male sex, age, sawtooth pattern, area under the inspiratory flow-volume curve (AreaFI), and neck circumference to objectively identify patients at higher risk of OSA. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) metrics. The M-APNE Score was compared to other non-symptom-based tools, the No-Apnea Score and the Symptomless Multivariable Apnea Prediction (sMVAP) model, using the Delong test.
RESULTS: The M-APNE Score showed sensitivity rates of 79.3% in the training set, 70.8% in the test, and 80% in the validation set. ROC analysis for M-APNE score yielded AUCs of 0.82 in the training, 0.76 in the test, 0.82 in the validation set. The discriminative accuracy of M-APNE Score were found to be better than the No-Apnea Score (AUC = 0.82 vs. 0.76, p < 0.001) and the sMVAP (AUC = 0.82 vs. 0.75, p = 0.001) in the training set. Hosmer Lemeshow test indicated good calibration for M-Apne Score (p = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS: The M-APNE Score is a robust and objective tool for OSA screening, potentially reducing classification errors and improving accuracy.