Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Which Screening Questionnaire is Best for Predicting Obstructive Sleep Apnea in the Sleep Clinic Population Considering Age, Gender, and Comorbidities?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the predictive power of the screening questionnaires including Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Berlin questionnaire (BQ) and STOP-Bang questionnaire (SBQ) to identify the high-risk patients for OSA in a sleep clinic setting considering age, gender and comorbidities.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: 1003 patients who admitted to our sleep center with the preliminary diagnosis of OSA between June 2016-May 2018 were included in the study. All patients underwent in-lab polysomnographic examination and filled out ESS, Berlin and STOP-Bang questionnaires. Predictive parameters for each screening questionnaires were calculated.

RESULTS: For apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥5/h, the sensitivity and the specificity of the EES, BQ and SBQ were 50.6%, 89.8%, 97.9% and 56.6%, 27.3%, 16.2% respectively. The STOP-Bang questionnaire had the highest sensitivity in both males and females (99.1%, 94.8% respectively) and in the different age groups (97.3% for ≥45 age-group, 99.2% for ≥65 age-group). In the groups of patients with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma, the sensitivity of the STOP-Bang questionnaire was 99.5%, 100%, 99.5%, 100%, 97.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION: The STOP-Bang questionnaire had the highest sensitivity for detecting high-risk patients for OSA in a sleep clinic setting. STOP-Bang questionnaire was superior to the Berlin questionnaire and ESS in the different groups of age, gender, and comorbidities. Considering the close relationship between OSA and comorbidities, it is critical to screen patients in terms of OSA in outpatient clinics of internal medicine, cardiology, and chest disease departments. The STOP-Bang questionnaire, with its high sensitivity, may be useful for screening OSA. However, the low specificity should be improved in the questionnaire.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app