Antony KM, Agrawal A, Arndt ME, Murphy AM, Alapat PM, Guntupalli KK, Aagaard KM. Obstructive sleep apnea in pregnancy: reliability of prevalence and prediction estimates.
J Perinatol 2014;
34:587-93. [PMID:
24674980 PMCID:
PMC4117820 DOI:
10.1038/jp.2014.48]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2013] [Revised: 02/18/2014] [Accepted: 02/19/2014] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
We sought to ascertain the validity of two screening scales for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in pregnancy and to establish the prevalence of OSA in pregnancy.
STUDY DESIGN
In this prospective observational study, two screening scales were administered. Screen positive subjects were referred for diagnostic polysomnography (PSG); if admitted for antepartum care, screen positive subjects underwent a modified study with a type 3 device (T3D).
RESULT
A total of 1509 subjects underwent OSA screening; 58 completed diagnostic testing. Neither measure was a reliable diagnostic tool for OSA as determined by T3D or PSG (detection rates of 10.3% and 18.0%, respectively). Among screen positive subjects undergoing PSG or T3D testing, 15.5% ultimately met 'gold standard' OSA diagnostic criteria for an estimated point prevalence of 4.9%.
CONCLUSION
In this prospective trial, screening positive on the Berlin questionnaire or Epworth sleepiness scale was poorly predictive of OSA among gravidae and was associated with a high false referral rate.
Collapse