Sleep disordered breathing in children - Diagnostic questionnaires, comparative analysis
Sleep disordered breathing in children - Diagnostic questionnaires, comparative analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijporl.2019.02.008
复制
发表时间：
2019-05-01
影响因子：
1.5
通讯作者：
Krzeski, Antoni
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Burghard, Marcin;Brozek-Madry, Eliza;Krzeski, Antoni
研究目的：这项工作的目的是目前可用的问卷调查，使诊断筛查时，阻塞性睡眠呼吸障碍（SDB）的儿童被怀疑或其影响进行观察，多导睡眠图是不可用的。这些问卷旨在促进进一步的诊断过程，甚至治疗决策，帮助选择最佳的临床实践的指定条件，与告诫，这些都不代表诊断相当于PSG。方法：问卷进行分析：儿童睡眠问卷（PSQ）、睡眠临床记录（SCR）、OSA-18评分（OSA-18）、Brouilette评分（BS）、“我好睡”问卷调查表的比较分析包括以下参数：管理的简单性和时间;聘请医生或其他受过训练的个人的必要性;考虑到患者的检查;结果：7份调查问卷进行分析，比较了它们之间的异同。7例中有6例被评价为给药简单。完成问卷调查所需的时间在1到60分钟之间。其中三个涉及医生或受过培训的人员。7份问卷中有2份需要体检。估计其中5例的灵敏度在59 - 96%之间。特异性介于46%和72%之间。结论：几个问卷调查，使快速，简单，廉价的筛查OSAS已经创建。4份（分析的7份）问卷可能有助于诊断儿童阻塞性SDB-2份遵循当前（2015）建议。然而，需要进一步努力优化这些工具，特别是提高其特异性。
Study objectives: The purpose of this work is to present available questionnaires enabling diagnostic screening when obstructive sleep disordered breathing (SDB) in a child is suspected or its effects are observed and poly-somnography is unavailable. These questionnaires are designed to facilitate further diagnostic process or even therapeutic decisions, aid in selecting the optimal one for the specified conditions of clinical practice, with the caveat that none of these represents a diagnostic equivalent to PSG.Methods: The questionnaires subjected to analysis: Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire (PSQ), Sleep Clinical Record (SCR), OSA-18 score (OSA-18), Brouilette score (BS), "I'm Sleepy" questionnaire (I'M SLEEPY), and "Sleeping Sleepless Sleepy Disturbed Rest" questionnaire (SSSDR).The comparative analysis of questionnaires included the following parameters: simplicity and time of administer; necessity to engage a physician or other trained individual; taking into account examination of the patient; type and scope of considered symptoms and consequences of obstructive SDB, sensitivity, specificity, recommendations of the guidelines.Results: Seven questionnaires were subjected to analysis with presentation of their similarities and differences. Six out of seven were evaluated as simple in administration. Time required to fulfill the questionnaires ranged between 1 and 60 min. Three of them involved a physician or a trained personnel. Physical examination was necessary in two out of seven questionnaires. Sensitivity was estimated in 5 of them and ranged between 59 and 96%. Specificity ranged between 46 and 72%.Conclusions: Several questionnaires enabling quick, simple, and inexpensive screening for OSAS have been created. Four (of the seven analyzed) questionnaires may be useful in diagnosis of obstructive SDB in children - two follow current (2015) recommendations. However, there is a need for further work on optimizing such tools, particularly on improving their specificity.