Sleep medicine · 2003
Microsleep and sleepiness: a comparison of multiple sleep latency test and scoring of microsleep as a diagnostic test for excessive daytime sleepiness.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Tirunahari Vijaya L, Zaidi Syed A, Sharma Rakesh, Skurnick Joan, Ashtyani Hormoz
Аннотация
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) and scoring of microsleep (presence of sleep electroencephalograph between 3 and 15s in an epoch) as a diagnostic test for excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS).
DESIGN: A retrospective study.
SETTING: Sleep center at a tertiary care teaching hospital.
SUBJECTS: Patients referred to a sleep center who had an MSLT and one or more of the following symptoms; tiredness, sleepiness, memory loss, accidents/near accidents and gap driving.
INTERVENTIONS: Full night polysomnography (PSG) and next day MSLT were performed. Patients were classified as 'microsleep-positive' or 'microsleep-negative' according to presence or absence of microsleep.
RESULTS: Patients (n=92) were divided into three groups according to their MSLT results; group A had an MSLT</=5min (n=38), group B had an MSLT=6-10min (n=26), and group C had an MSLT>10min (n=28). The number of patients with symptoms of tiredness and memory loss were statistically higher in group A compared with groups B and C (P=0.036). The number of patients with symptoms of EDS, in groups B and C, was significantly higher in patients with microsleep than without microsleep (P<0.05). By a paired McNemar's test, the better performance of adding microsleep to MSLT (sensitivity 42.9%; specificity 63.6%) to assess EDS was statistically significant (P=0.0096).
CONCLUSIONS: Microsleep determination during an MSLT is a more sensitive and specific test for EDS as compared to MSLT alone.
DESIGN: A retrospective study.
SETTING: Sleep center at a tertiary care teaching hospital.
SUBJECTS: Patients referred to a sleep center who had an MSLT and one or more of the following symptoms; tiredness, sleepiness, memory loss, accidents/near accidents and gap driving.
INTERVENTIONS: Full night polysomnography (PSG) and next day MSLT were performed. Patients were classified as 'microsleep-positive' or 'microsleep-negative' according to presence or absence of microsleep.
RESULTS: Patients (n=92) were divided into three groups according to their MSLT results; group A had an MSLT</=5min (n=38), group B had an MSLT=6-10min (n=26), and group C had an MSLT>10min (n=28). The number of patients with symptoms of tiredness and memory loss were statistically higher in group A compared with groups B and C (P=0.036). The number of patients with symptoms of EDS, in groups B and C, was significantly higher in patients with microsleep than without microsleep (P<0.05). By a paired McNemar's test, the better performance of adding microsleep to MSLT (sensitivity 42.9%; specificity 63.6%) to assess EDS was statistically significant (P=0.0096).
CONCLUSIONS: Microsleep determination during an MSLT is a more sensitive and specific test for EDS as compared to MSLT alone.