Use of Berlin questionnaire in comparison to polysomnography and home sleep study in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is a common disorder with significant morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the Berlin questionnaire in patients with suspected OSAS undergoing PSG in the sleep laboratory setting against those going through the Embletta™ portable diagnostic system (Embletta PDS) at home. METHODS: Patients with suspected OSAS were recruited from respiratory clinics to complete Berlin questionnaire and Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS). Patients were randomized to undergo either home-based sleep test (group A) or hospital-based polysomnography (PSG) (group B). RESULTS: Three hundreds and sixteen subjects with newly referred suspected OSAS were recruited and randomized into group A (n = 157) and group B (n = 159). The prevalence of moderate to severe OSAS defined as apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 15/h was 54%. The Berlin questionnaire identified 69.7% (n = 99) of subjects as high risk in group A and 77.5% (n = 100) in group B. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) of the questionnaire to predict an AHI ≥ 15/h as diagnosed by PSG was 78, 23, 67 and 35%. When compared with Embletta PDS, the specificity and NPV increased to 48 and 63%. The area under the Receiver Operator Curve (ROC) based on PSG (AUC = 0.539, 95%CI 0.417, 0.661) and based on home Embletta (AUC = 0.712, 95%CI 0.617, 0.907). CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire was not reliable in predicting OSAS through PSG AHI whereas there was some predictive ability in discriminating patients with OSAS from normal subjects based on home Embletta sleep test. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01828216) on 10 April 2013.

Continuous positive airway pressure for obstructive sleep apnoea does not improve asthma control.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Unrecognized obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) may lead to poor asthma control despite optimal therapy. We assessed asthma control, airway responsiveness, daytime sleepiness and health status at baseline and 3 months after continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment among asthma patients with nocturnal symptoms and OSAS. METHODS: Patients with nocturnal asthma symptoms despite receiving at least moderate-dose inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting bronchodilators underwent a home sleep study using 'Embletta' portable diagnostic system. Patients with significant OSAS (apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) ≥10/h) were randomized to receive either CPAP or conservative treatment for 3 months. RESULTS: Among 145 patients recruited, 122 underwent sleep study with 41 (33.6%) having AHI ≥10/h. Patients with significant OSAS had higher BMI (27.4 (5.1) vs 25.1 (4.5) kg/m2 , P = 0.016), bigger neck circumference (36.6 (3.1) vs 34.8 (3.6) cm, P = 0.006) and lower minimum SaO2 (80.7 (6.6) vs 87.2 (3.9) %, P < 0.001). Using intention-to-treat analysis among 37 patients with AHI ≥10/h (CPAP group (n = 17) vs control group (n = 20)), there was no significant difference in Asthma Control Test score (CPAP 3.2 (2.7) vs control 2.4 (5.7), P = 0.568) but the CPAP group had a greater improvement in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (-3.0 (4.5) vs 0.5(3.8), P = 0.014), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (0.6 (0.8) vs 0.02 (0.7), P = 0.022) and vitality domain in the SF-36 questionnaire (14.7 (16.8) vs 0.3 (16.2), P = 0.012) after 3 months. Data are presented as mean (SD) unless otherwise stated. CONCLUSION: A high prevalence of OSAS was found among patients with asthma and snoring. CPAP therapy for 3 months did not enhance asthma control but improved daytime sleepiness, quality of life and vitality.