Evaluating Out-of-Center Testing Devices for Diagnosing Obstructive Sleep Apnea

by

Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is a worldwide condition and is therefore a major health challenge with many patients affected. This is a sleep disorder in which the muscles at the back of the throat loosen up while sleeping to the extent that the airway becomes partially or totally blocked, and there is a temporary cessation of breathing. If OSA is left undiagnosed and untreated, it could lead to other conditions such as cardiovascular illnesses, hypertension, stroke, and, in turn, suffering from dementia. Of the diagnostic procedures that have been employed, PSG is the most favored and forms the reference technique; it is an all-night study performed in a sleep laboratory. Hence, although PSG has been acclaimed as the gold standard in diagnosing sleep disorders across the globe due to its very high sensitivity coupled with specificity, it is not very affordable, not easily accessible, and it takes a whole night of stay in the laboratory. As a result, out-of-center (OOC) devices have been developed, and patients can be diagnosed at home, thereby expanding OSA diagnosis. Each of the presented OOC testing devices is described based on the criteria of technological advancement, advantages, and concerns, as well as a review of their significance in the diagnosis of OSA.

The Growing Need for Out-of-Center Testing Devices

As the frequency of sleep apnea rises and the number of available polysomnographies in sleep laboratories remains limited, the creation of techniques to efficiently diagnose the condition has become urgent. These OOC testing devices are mobile, cheaper than the normal testing devices, and patients can take various tests at the comfort of their home instead of having to go to hospitals, which is tiring for those in rural areas where laboratory services may not easily be accessed. Nevertheless, the efficiency and precision of the OOC devices have always remained disputable, thereby restricting their application. The sensors and scoring for in-lab polysomnography are guided by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM), and applying the same parameters to OOC devices has been difficult. Diagnostic techniques for OSA are still being developed as new technologies, and the sensors for diagnostic tools are being launched.

Yearwise Publication Trend on “sleep apnea”

Find publication trends on relevant topics

Classification of OOC Testing Devices

Portable devices for diagnosing OSA can be categorized according to the parameters, which they measure, apart from position. The SCOPER model of classification categorizes devices based on assessment capabilities of sleep, cardiovascular, oximetry, position, effort, and respiratory. Indeed, these devices depend on some of these parameters to ensure they provide a correct OSA detection.

Sleep: Biphasic and monophasic mechanisms impact the methods used to diagnose OSA; hence, the use of equipment to track sleep cycles is relevant. However, some of the OOC devices may be constructed without EEG sensors, reducing features such as sleep staging, which is essential for correct diagnosis.

Cardiovascular Function: Due to the presence and frequency of apneas and hypopneas affecting the rhythms of respiration, which are directly linked with heart rate and blood pressure, cardiovascular function is an important parameter. Some OOC devices monitor changes in the levels of heart variability as a sign of interrupted sleep.

Oximetry: Blood oxygen levels are important factors taken into account when determining the severity of OSA because apneas initiate desaturation. All OOC devices feature pulse oximetry sensors to record a lowering in oxygen level during the nighttime in most cases.

Position: The position that one has when falling asleep can actually increase the severity of OSA. Positional sensors in OOC devices assist in detecting positional OSA events and finding positional treatment approaches.

Effort: The most critical measure needed for the diagnosis of OSA is respiratory effort. OOC devices could include respiratory inductance plethysmography (RIP) belts or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) belts that detect thoracoabdomina movement and breathing attempts.

Respiratory Function: While oxy-hemogloin sensors record the lack or decrease of air flow during apneas and hypopneas. When it comes to measurements, some devices have nasal cannulas, and others have the use of thermistors and pressure transducers for airflow detection.

Oximetry as a Core Measurement

Oximetry is useful in the diagnostic process of OSA because the latter’s apneic events are characterized by oxygen desaturation. Criteria require oximetry for rating apneas and hypopneas in polysomnography, and most devices of OOC contain oximetry as an element. Many specialists that utilize pulse oximetry in OSA use this assessment to quantify the severity of the condition, but pulse oximetry is insufficient for differentiating between OSA and CSA, a concern that affects oximetry-only devices.

Respiratory Effort and its Role in Diagnosis

Reliance on respiratory effort is crucial for OOC devices to distinguish obstructive and central occasions. OSA is defined as respiratory effort in opposition to reduced airflow, while CSA has no breathing attempts at all. Most of the current OOC devices employ either the RIP belts or the PVDF belts to monitor the thoracoabdominal movement to evaluate the level of respiratory effort. Comparison of different patient-worn sensors, namely the PVDF belts and RIP sensors, in detecting respiratory events gives an indication that the PVDF belts are just as efficient in this area; hence, the technology may be considered as a viable option.

The Role of Nasal Pressure Cannulas and Thermistors

The other core components of OSA diagnosis include airflow measurement. The most standard instruments used in laboratories and OOC are nasal pressure cannulas and thermistors. Nasal pressure cannulas record pressure shifts in the nostrils, while thermistors register temperatures differing due to airflow. Nasal pressure is felt to be the most accurate signal for hypopneas, while thermistors are more accurate for identifying apneas. There are some OOC devices that integrate these sensors in order to increase the precision of diagnosis.

Recent Publications on “sleep apnea”

Find publications on relevant topics

Peripheral Arterial Tonometry (PAT) Devices

PAT is another potential technology for diagnosing OSA. PAT devices reflect changes in peripheral vascular tone due to sympathetic nerve stimulations in apneas. These devices are portable, do not require an invasive process, and can be practiced at home, hence suitable for OOC testing. Science proves that PAT devices’ reliability for diagnosing moderate to severe OSA is not so successful when it comes to mild OSA or distinguishing between OSA and CSA.

Acoustic Sensors and Other Emerging Technologies

There are recurring innovations in the aspects of OOC testing. Acoustic sensors, for instance, can discern sounds created while breathing, for instance, snoring. However, using acoustic sensors to diagnose OSA is still under research and thus cannot be used widely. Other promising technologies are end-tidal CO2 sensors, which measure PCO2 in expired air; however, such devices are probably more appropriate for continuous monitoring in hospitalized patients rather than screening at home.

Challenges in OOC Device Validation

One major limitation in studying OOC devices is the absence of standardized protocols for research approaches and reporting of results. The current literature shows the existing lack of uniformity in regards to the reporting of sensitivity values relating to OSA severity. Furthermore, most OOC devices have not been compared with the gold standard polysomnography done in a sleep lab. Future large-sample, methodologically sound comparative studies are needed to establish the inter- as well as intra-observer reliability of the OOC devices in various subjects.

Clinical Applications and Recommendations

Several questions must be answered when choosing an OOC testing device: How likely is the patient to have OSA? If the device is available, what features distinguish the device? Low-complexity PAP devices with good oximetric and respiratory effort data measurement may be appropriate where patients’ pre-test OSA likelihood rating is high. However, if there are clinical suspicions of CSA or other forms of complex sleep disorders external, then in-lab attended polysomnography remains important. Clinicians should also know that OOC devices can either misidentify OSA or provide an inaccurate estimation of the severity of the condition, especially for mild form cases.

Conclusion

Out-of-center testing devices are therefore a major step in the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea. First, they are convenient as well as accessible and cheap, which is particularly important when increasing the demand for diagnosis of OSA. However, such devices have limitations. However, some are useful in diagnosing moderate to severe OSA but can miss cases with mild OSA or differentiate between OSA and other sleep disorders. Further research is required to increase the efficiency of OOC devices up to the level of laboratory polysomnography. Until these uses are resolved, they should choose OOC devices according to patients’ needs and diagnostician goals since OOC devices remain supplementary to conventional PSGs.

References

  1. Grigg-Damberger, M.M., 2012. The AASM Scoring Manual four years later. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 8(3), pp.323-332.
  2. Koo, B.B., Drummond, C., Surovec, S., Johnson, N., Marvin, S.A. and Redline, S., 2011. Validation of a polyvinylidene fluoride impedance sensor for respiratory event classification during polysomnography. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 7(5), pp.479-485.
  3. Collop, N.A., Tracy, S.L., Kapur, V., Mehra, R., Kuhlmann, D., Fleishman, S.A. and Ojile, J.M., 2011. Obstructive sleep apnea devices for out-of-center (OOC) testing: technology evaluation. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 7(5), pp.531-548.
  4. Gooneratne, N.S., Richards, K.C., Joffe, M., Lam, R.W., Pack, F., Staley, B., Dinges, D.F. and Pack, A.I., 2011. Sleep disordered breathing with excessive daytime sleepiness is a risk factor for mortality in older adults. Sleep, 34(4), pp.435-442.
  5. Kim, S.M., Park, K.S., Nam, H., Ahn, S.W., Kim, S., Sung, J.J. and Lee, K.W., 2011. Capnography for assessing nocturnal hypoventilation and predicting compliance with subsequent noninvasive ventilation in patients with ALS. PLoS One, 6(3), p.e17893.
  6. Accardo, J.A., Shults, J., Leonard, M.B., Traylor, J. and Marcus, C.L., 2010. Differences in overnight polysomnography scores using the adult and pediatric criteria for respiratory events in adolescents. Sleep, 33(10), pp.1333-1339.
  7. Redline, S., Yenokyan, G., Gottlieb, D.J., Shahar, E., O’Connor, G.T., Resnick, H.E., Diener-West, M., Sanders, M.H., Wolf, P.A., Geraghty, E.M. and Ali, T., 2010. Obstructive sleep apnea–hypopnea and incident stroke: the sleep heart health study. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 182(2), pp.269-277.

Top Experts on “sleep apnea“