ArticleBMC anesthesiology2026
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) screening and risk of postoperative complications in adult surgical patients: differences between the STOP-Bang and Step-2 scoring strategy.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications. However, data on the relationship between previously undiagnosed high-risk patients and postoperative outcomes remain limited. The study aimed to evaluate the association between OSA risk-assessed using the STOP-Bang score (SBS) and the Step-2 scoring strategy - and the incidence of postoperative complications as well as prolonged hospital length of stay.
methodsA total of 4,292 adult patients undergoing elective, non-cardiac surgery between 2015 to 2016 were included. All patients underwent preoperative assessment for OSA risk using the STOP-Bang score questionnaire and the Step-2 algorithm. Patients were stratified into low-risk (SBS 0-2) and high-risk (HR) groups, defined as either (SBS 5-8 (S1HR) or Step-2 high-risk (S2HR). The primary outcome was the occurrence of major postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included prolonged hospital length of stay.
resultsPatients classified as high-risk for OSA exhibited a significant increased risk of major postoperative complications compared with the low-risk group (odds ratio [OR]: 1.65 (95% CI 1.09-2.48); S2HR vs. low-risk: OR 2.17 (95% CI 1.57-3.01). No significant difference in complications risk was observed between the two high-risk stratification methods (OR 0.96 (95% CI 0.64-1.33; P = 0.8). Similarly, high-risk patients were more likely to experience prolonged hospital stays (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.02-1.76; P = 0.003 for S1HR; OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.29-1.87; P = 0.01 for S2HR), with no significant difference between the high-risk groups (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.79-1.34; P = 0.7).
conclusionsA high-risk for OSA, as identified by either the STOP-Bang or Step-2 assessment tools, is independently associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications and prolonged hospital length of stay. Both screening strategies demonstrated comparable predictive performance. These findings underscore the value of structured preoperative screening in identifying patients with a high likelihood of previously undiagnosed OSA and in guiding perioperative risk stratification and postoperative management.
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.