Prediction of obstructive sleep apnea using GOAL questionnaire in adults with or without excessive daytime sleepiness: A cross-sectional study

Sex-dependent GOAL screening performance in adults at risk for obstructive sleep apnea

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate possible sex-related differences in the performance of the GOAL, a 4-item obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) screening instrument in adults.

METHODS

Between July 2019 and June 2021, this cross-sectional study included consecutively recruited patients from one Brazilian sleep laboratory undergoing overnight polysomnography. Individuals with GOAL scores ≥ 2 of a maximum of 4 points are classified at high risk for OSA diagnosis. Actual OSA severity was based on the apnea-hypopnea index: ≥ 5.0/h as any OSA, ≥ 15.0/h as moderate-to-severe OSA, and ≥ 30.0/h as severe OSA. Performance of the GOAL instrument in women and men was assessed by the discriminatory ability (obtained from area under the curve [AUC]-Receiver Operating Characteristic curves) and 2×2 contingency tables.

RESULTS

A total of 2,978 subjects (55.3% males) were evaluated. The frequency of GOAL-defined OSA high-risk was statistically higher in men when compared to women (p < 0.001). The GOAL predictive parameters for screening all severity OSA levels were as follows: in females, sensitivity ranging from 58.2% to 78.3% and specificity ranging from 60.0% to 77.6%, while in males, sensitivity ranging from 90.5% to 96.9% and specificity from 20.7% to 46.8%. The GOAL questionnaire had similar discriminatory properties, assessed by AUC, in women and in men: i) any OSA: 0.741 vs. 0.771 (p = 0.204), ii) moderate-to-severe OSA: 0.727 vs. 0.737 (p = 0.595), and iii) severe OSA: 0.728 vs. 0.703 (p = 0.240); respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The GOAL instrument emerges as a useful tool for screening adult individuals and displays similar performance in both women and men.

Screening for obstructive sleep apnea: comparing the American Academy of Sleep Medicine proposed criteria with the STOP-Bang, NoSAS, and GOAL instruments

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the performance of the 2017 American Academy of Sleep Medicine criteria (AASM2017) in screening obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and compared them with 3 other validated instruments: NoSAS score, STOP-Bang, and GOAL questionnaires.

METHODS

From July 2019 to December 2021, 4,499 adults undergoing overnight polysomnography were included. The AASM2017 instrument considers an increased high risk for moderate-to-severe OSA in the presence of excessive daytime sleepiness and at least 2 of the following 3 criteria: loud snoring; observed apnea, gasping, or choking; and hypertension. OSA severity was based on polysomnography-derived apnea-hypopnea index cutoffs: 5.0 events/h, 15.0 events/h, and 30.0 events/h. Predictive performance was evaluated by the area under the curve and contingency tables.

RESULTS

When screening for any OSA severity, AASM2017 displayed a sensitivity of 31.0-40.6% and a specificity of 80.8-89.6%. For all apnea-hypopnea index thresholds, AASM2017, unlike the GOAL, STOP-Bang, and NoSAS, exhibited superior specificity but markedly lower sensitivity. GOAL, STOP-Bang, and NoSAS, but not AASM2017 criteria, emerged as an adequate screening tool for any OSA severity (all areas under the curve > 0.7) and performed significantly better than AASM2017 in predicting any OSA severity (all P < .001). For all severity OSA levels, GOAL, STOP-Bang, and NoSAS displayed similar performance when compared to each other (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

GOAL, STOP-Bang, and NoSAS instruments, but not AASM2017 criteria, emerge as useful OSA screening tools in a large referral single-center clinical cohort.

CITATION

Duarte RLM, Magalhães-da-Silveira FJ, Gozal D. Screening for obstructive sleep apnea: comparing the American Academy of Sleep Medicine proposed criteria with the STOP-Bang, NoSAS, and GOAL instruments. J Clin Sleep Med. 2023;19(7):1239-1246.

Validation of GOAL questionnaire as screening tool for clinical obstructive sleep apnea: A large sample study in China

Background

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a serious disease with a high prevalence in the general population. The purpose of this study is to explore the effectiveness of the GOAL questionnaire in the clinical screening of OSA and compare it with other existing screening tools.

Materials and methods

Outpatients and inpatients who underwent polysomnography (PSG) examination at the Sleep Medicine Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from January 2013 to November 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. The basic data such as demographic, medical history, etc., and PSG data of the patients were collected, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and area under the curve (AUC) of GOAL and five other screening scales (the NoSAS score, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, the Berlin questionnaire, STOP, and STOP-Bang questionnaire) were calculated.

Results

Data from 2,171 participants (1,644 male; 78%) were analyzed there were 1,507 OSA patients [Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI) ≥ 5 events/h] among them, accounting for about 69.415%. No matter which cut-off point (AHI ≥ 5, 15 and 30 events/h), the AUC score reveals that GOAL questionnaire had comparable screening ability to the NoSAS and STOP-BANG, and performed better than the ESS, and the AUC scores of the STOP questionnaire and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) were both lower than 0.7. When the cut-off point of the AHI was 5 events/h, the AUC of GOAL was the highest at 0.799 (0.781–0.816), and its sensitivity was the highest at 89.1%. The sensitivity levels of the NoSAS score and STOP-Bang questionnaire were 67.4 and 78.8% respectively, while ESS and the Berlin questionnaire have higher specificity (70.2 and 72.3% respectively) but lower sensitivity (49.3 and 60.0% respectively).

Conclusion

GOAL is a free, efficient and easy to manage tool with a screening ability comparable to NoSAS and STOP-Bang, and better than that of ESS.

Incorporating neck circumference or neck-to-height ratio into the GOAL questionnaire to better detect and describe obstructive sleep apnea with application to clinical decisions

Objective

Although neck circumference (NC) and neck-to-height ratio (NHR) have been recognized as effective predictors of the clinical diagnosis of adult obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), they have not been included in the widely used GOAL questionnaire. Not coincidentally, the NHR has not been adequately considered in the development and validation of the STOP-Bang questionnaire, No-Apnea score and the NoSAS score. The motivation for the study was (1) to combine the GOAL questionnaire with the NC and NHR, respectively, to evaluate its predictive performance and (2) to compare it with the STOP-Bang questionnaire, the No-Apnea score, the NOSAS score, and the GOAL questionnaire.

Materials and methods

This retrospectively allocated cross-sectional study was conducted from November 2017 to March 2022 in adults who underwent nocturnal polysomnography (PSG) or home sleep apnea testing (HSAT). In this paper, the GOAL questionnaire was combined with the NC and NHR, respectively, using logistic regression. The performance of the six screening tools was assessed by discriminatory ability [area under the curve (AUC) obtained from receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves] and a 2 × 2 league table [including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR−)] and compared under AHI ≥5/h, AHI ≥15/h, and AHI ≥30/h conditions.

Results

A total of 288 patients were enrolled in the study. For all severity OSA levels, the sensitivity of GOAL+NC ranged from 70.12 to 70.80%, and specificity ranged from 86.49 to 76.16%. The sensitivity of GOAL+NHR ranged from 73.31 to 81.75%, while specificity ranged from 83.78 to 70.86%. As for area under the curve (AUC) value under ROC curve, when AHI ≥5/h, compared with GOAL (0.806), No-Apnea (0.823), NoSAS (0.817), and GOAL+NC (0.815), GOAL+NHR (0.831) obtained the highest AUC value, but lower than STOP-Bang (0.837).

Conclusion

The predictive power of incorporating NC or NHR into the GOAL questionnaire was significantly better than that of the GOAL itself. Furthermore, GOAL+NHR was superior to GOAL+NC in predicting OSA severity and better than the No-Apnea score and the NoSAS score.

Brazilian Thoracic Association Consensus on Sleep-disordered Breathing

Sleep is essential for the proper functioning of all individuals. Sleep-disordered breathing can occur at any age and is a common reason for medical visits. The objective of this consensus is to update knowledge about the main causes of sleep-disordered breathing in adult and pediatric populations, with an emphasis on obstructive sleep apnea. Obstructive sleep apnea is an extremely prevalent but often underdiagnosed disease. It is often accompanied by comorbidities, notably cardiovascular, metabolic, and neurocognitive disorders, which have a significant impact on quality of life and mortality rates. Therefore, to create this consensus, the Sleep-Disordered Breathing Department of the Brazilian Thoracic Association brought together 14 experts with recognized, proven experience in sleep-disordered breathing.