Trial reportSleep2014
Effectiveness of home single-channel nasal pressure for sleep apnea diagnosis.
Trial report in Sleep, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Validity of a Supersimplified Device for Diagnosis of Patients With Suspected Obstructive Sleep Apnoea-hypopnoea (OSAH).
Validity and Cost-effectiveness Analysis of a Home Respiratory Polygraphy for the Diagnosis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Children (DINISAS)
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis of Sleep Apnoea Using a Mandibular Monitor and Machine Learning Analysis: One-Night Agreement Compared to in-Home Polysomnography.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- A Minimum Set of Physiological Parameters to Diagnose Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome Using Non-Invasive Portable Monitors. A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Economic evaluation of diagnostic sleep studies for obstructive sleep apnoea: a systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Primary care and sleep unit agreement in management decisions for sleep apnea: a prospective study in Spain.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2020Article
- Technologic advances in the assessment and management of obstructive sleep apnoea beyond the apnoea-hypopnoea index: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Utility of home sleep apnea testing devices in patients with cardiac conditions-critical manual interpretation of the raw data is important.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2019Article
- Automatic Sleep Staging in Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea Using Single-Channel Frontal EEG.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2019Article
- New organisation for follow-up and assessment of treatment efficacy in sleep apnoea.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2019Review
- Distance to Specialist Medical Care and Diagnosis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Rural Saskatchewan.Canadian respiratory journal · 2019Article
- Primary Care Physicians Can Comprehensively Manage Patients with Sleep Apnea. A Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2018Article
- Article
- Article
- Predicting Obstructive Sleep Apnea with Periodic Snoring Sound Recorded at Home.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2016Article
- Diagnostic approaches to respiratory sleep disorders.Journal of thoracic disease · 2015Review
- Article
- Article
- [Obstructive Sleep Apnea].Open respiratory archivesArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
38 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHome single-channel nasal pressure (HNP) may be an alternative to polysomnography (PSG) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) diagnosis, but no cost studies have yet been carried out. Automatic scoring is simpler but generally less effective than manual scoring.
objectivesTo determine the diagnostic efficacy and cost of both scorings (automatic and manual) compared with PSG, taking as a polysomnographic OSA diagnosis several apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) cutoff points.
methodsWe included suspected OSA patients in a multicenter study. They were randomized to home and hospital protocols. We constructed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for both scorings. Diagnostic efficacy was explored for several HNP AHI cutoff points, and costs were calculated for equally effective alternatives.
resultsOf 787 randomized patients, 752 underwent HNP. Manual scoring produced better ROC curves than automatic for AHI < 15; similar curves were obtained for AHI ≥ 15. A valid HNP with manual scoring would determine the presence of OSA (or otherwise) in 90% of patients with a polysomnographic AHI ≥ 5 cutoff point, in 74% of patients with a polysomnographic AHI ≥ 10 cutoff point, and in 61% of patients with a polysomnographic AHI ≥ 15 cutoff point. In the same way, a valid HNP with automatic scoring would determine the presence of OSA (or otherwise) in 73% of patients with a polysomnographic AHI ≥ 5 cutoff point, in 64% of patients with a polysomnographic AHI ≥ 10 cutoff point, and in 57% of patients with a polysomnographic AHI ≥ 15 cutoff point. The costs of either HNP approaches were 40% to 70% lower than those of PSG at the same level of diagnostic efficacy. Manual HNP had the lowest cost for low polysomnographic AHI levels (≥ 5 and ≥ 10), and manual and automatic scorings had similar costs for higher polysomnographic cutoff points (AHI ≥ 15) of diagnosis.
conclusionHome single-channel nasal pressure (HNP) is a cheaper alternative than polysomnography for obstructive sleep apnea diagnosis. HNP with manual scoring seems to have better diagnostic accuracy and a lower cost than automatic scoring for patients with low apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) levels, although automatic scoring has similar diagnostic accuracy and cost as manual scoring for intermediate and high AHI levels. Therefore, automatic scoring can be appropriately used, although diagnostic efficacy could improve if we carried out manual scoring on patients with AHI < 15. CLINICAL TRIALS INFORMATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01347398.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.