Multi-level obstruction in obstructive sleep apnoea: prevalence, severity and predictive factors.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise multi-level obstruction in terms of prevalence, obstructive sleep apnoea severity and predictive factors, and to collect epidemiological data on upper airway morphology in obstructive sleep apnoea patients. METHODS: Retrospective review of 250 obstructive sleep apnoea patients. RESULTS: On clinical examination, 171 patients (68.4 per cent) had multi-level obstruction, 49 (19.6 per cent) had single-level obstruction and 30 (12 per cent) showed no obstruction. Within each category of obstructive sleep apnoea severity, multi-level obstruction was more prevalent. Multi-level obstruction was associated with severe obstructive sleep apnoea (more than 30 events per hour) (p = 0.001). Obstructive sleep apnoea severity increased with the number of obstruction sites (correlation coefficient = 0.303, p < 0.001). Multi-level obstruction was more likely in younger (p = 0.042), male (p = 0.045) patients, with high body mass index (more than 30 kg/m2) (p < 0.001). Palatal (p = 0.004), tongue (p = 0.026) and lateral pharyngeal wall obstructions (p = 0.006) were associated with severe obstructive sleep apnoea. CONCLUSION: Multi-level obstruction is more prevalent in obstructive sleep apnoea and is associated with increased severity. Obstruction at certain anatomical levels contributes more towards obstructive sleep apnoea severity.

Why generic and disease-specific quality-of-life instruments should be used together for the evaluation of patients with persistent allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: The importance of assessing health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) has been well established, but the specific roles of rhinitis-specific or general health instruments have not been delineated. OBJECTIVE: We analysed the psychometric properties of a disease-specific instrument, the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) and the general health instrument, the Medical Outcome Short-Form 36 (SF-36) as they are employed in combination in patients with persistent AR in clinical practice. METHOD: We analysed the data collected from a prospective study of 43 newly diagnosed patients with persistent AR and 44 controls. We interviewed the patients four times, at baseline, weeks 4, 8 and 10. RESULTS: The RQLQ and SF-36 have good discriminative property, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. The RQLQ is superior to the SF-36 as an evaluative instrument because more of its domains respond to change, the magnitude of change was greater, and the response was faster. The SF-36 is more susceptible to floor and ceiling effects. Both instruments are unsuitable for mildly symptomatic patients based on Rasch model analysis. Each questionnaire assesses a distinct and significant portion of the total HRQL of persistent AR. CONCLUSION: The SF-36 and RQLQ are good for discriminating rhinitis patients from controls, but the former is poor for detecting changes in QOL. Both are inappropriate for mildly symptomatic patients. Each instrument measures non-overlapping halves of the measurable HRQL. For an assessment of the HRQL in persistent AR that is complete and responsive both instruments should be employed together.