使用前额脑电图设备验证多导睡眠监测仪的频谱睡眠评分法

Julie A. Onton, Katherine C. Simon, Allison B. Morehouse, Alessandra E Shuster, Jing Zhang, Andres Pena, S. Mednick
{"title":"使用前额脑电图设备验证多导睡眠监测仪的频谱睡眠评分法","authors":"Julie A. Onton, Katherine C. Simon, Allison B. Morehouse, Alessandra E Shuster, Jing Zhang, Andres Pena, S. Mednick","doi":"10.3389/frsle.2024.1349537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Visual scoring of sleep electroencephalography (EEG) has long been considered the gold standard for sleep staging. However, it has several drawbacks, including high cost, time-intensiveness, vulnerability to human variability, discomfort to patients, lack of visualization to validate the hypnogram, and no acknowledgment of differences between delta and slow oscillation deep sleep. This report highlights a spectral scoring approach that addresses all these shortcomings of visual scoring. Past algorithms have used spectral information to help classify traditional visual stages. The current method used the clearly visible spectral patterns to develop new spectral stages, which are similar to but not the same as visual stages. Importantly, spectral scoring delivers both a hypnogram and a whole-night spectrogram, which can be visually inspected to ensure accurate scoring.This study compared traditional visual scoring of 32-channel polysomnography with forehead-only spectral scoring from an EEG patch worn concurrently. The PSG was visually scored by trained technicians and the forehead patch was scored spectrally. Because non-rapid eye movement (NREM) stage divisions in spectral scoring are not based on visual NREM stages, the agreements are not expected to be as high as other automated sleep scoring algorithms. Rather, they are a guide to understanding spectral stages as they relate to the more widely understood visual stages and to emphasize reasons for the differences.The results showed that visual REM was highly recognized as spectral REM (89%). Visual wake was only scored as spectral Wake 47% of the time, partly because of excessive visual scoring of wake during Light and REM sleep. The majority of spectral Light (predominance of spindle power) was scored as N2 (74%), while less N2 was scored as Light (65%), mostly because of incorrect visual staging of Lo Deep sleep due to high-pass filtering. N3 was scored as both Hi Deep (13 Hz power, 42%) and Lo Deep (0–1 Hz power, 39%), constituting a total of 81% of N3.The results show that spectral scoring better identifies clinically relevant physiology at a substantially lower cost and in a more reproducible fashion than visual scoring, supporting further work exploring its use in clinical and research settings.","PeriodicalId":73106,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in sleep","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of spectral sleep scoring with polysomnography using forehead EEG device\",\"authors\":\"Julie A. Onton, Katherine C. Simon, Allison B. Morehouse, Alessandra E Shuster, Jing Zhang, Andres Pena, S. Mednick\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frsle.2024.1349537\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Visual scoring of sleep electroencephalography (EEG) has long been considered the gold standard for sleep staging. However, it has several drawbacks, including high cost, time-intensiveness, vulnerability to human variability, discomfort to patients, lack of visualization to validate the hypnogram, and no acknowledgment of differences between delta and slow oscillation deep sleep. This report highlights a spectral scoring approach that addresses all these shortcomings of visual scoring. Past algorithms have used spectral information to help classify traditional visual stages. The current method used the clearly visible spectral patterns to develop new spectral stages, which are similar to but not the same as visual stages. Importantly, spectral scoring delivers both a hypnogram and a whole-night spectrogram, which can be visually inspected to ensure accurate scoring.This study compared traditional visual scoring of 32-channel polysomnography with forehead-only spectral scoring from an EEG patch worn concurrently. The PSG was visually scored by trained technicians and the forehead patch was scored spectrally. Because non-rapid eye movement (NREM) stage divisions in spectral scoring are not based on visual NREM stages, the agreements are not expected to be as high as other automated sleep scoring algorithms. Rather, they are a guide to understanding spectral stages as they relate to the more widely understood visual stages and to emphasize reasons for the differences.The results showed that visual REM was highly recognized as spectral REM (89%). Visual wake was only scored as spectral Wake 47% of the time, partly because of excessive visual scoring of wake during Light and REM sleep. The majority of spectral Light (predominance of spindle power) was scored as N2 (74%), while less N2 was scored as Light (65%), mostly because of incorrect visual staging of Lo Deep sleep due to high-pass filtering. N3 was scored as both Hi Deep (13 Hz power, 42%) and Lo Deep (0–1 Hz power, 39%), constituting a total of 81% of N3.The results show that spectral scoring better identifies clinically relevant physiology at a substantially lower cost and in a more reproducible fashion than visual scoring, supporting further work exploring its use in clinical and research settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73106,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in sleep\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in sleep\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsle.2024.1349537\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in sleep","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsle.2024.1349537","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,睡眠脑电图(EEG)的视觉评分一直被认为是睡眠分期的黄金标准。然而,这种方法有几个缺点,包括成本高、耗时长、易受人为因素的影响、患者感到不适、缺乏可视化的催眠图验证以及不承认δ和慢振荡深度睡眠之间的差异。本报告重点介绍一种频谱评分方法,它能解决视觉评分的所有这些缺点。过去的算法使用光谱信息来帮助划分传统的视觉阶段。目前的方法利用清晰可见的光谱模式来开发新的光谱阶段,这些阶段与视觉阶段相似,但并不相同。重要的是,频谱评分同时提供了催眠图和整夜频谱图,可通过目测检查以确保评分的准确性。本研究比较了传统的 32 通道多导睡眠图目测评分和同时佩戴的脑电图贴片的纯前额频谱评分。PSG 由训练有素的技术人员进行目视评分,额部贴片则进行频谱评分。由于频谱评分中的非快速眼动(NREM)阶段划分并非基于视觉 NREM 阶段,因此预计其一致性不会像其他自动睡眠评分算法那样高。结果显示,视觉快速动眼期被高度认可为光谱快速动眼期(89%)。结果表明,视觉快速动眼期被高度识别为光谱快速动眼期(89%),而视觉清醒期仅有 47% 被识别为光谱清醒期,部分原因是在浅睡眠和快速动眼期睡眠中视觉清醒期被过度识别。大部分轻度睡眠(纺锤体功率占主导地位)被记为 N2(74%),而较少的 N2 被记为轻度睡眠(65%),这主要是因为高通滤波导致对低深度睡眠的视觉分期不正确。结果表明,频谱评分能更好地识别与临床相关的生理学特征,而且与视觉评分相比,成本更低,可重复性更好,这为进一步探索其在临床和研究环境中的应用提供了支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validation of spectral sleep scoring with polysomnography using forehead EEG device
Visual scoring of sleep electroencephalography (EEG) has long been considered the gold standard for sleep staging. However, it has several drawbacks, including high cost, time-intensiveness, vulnerability to human variability, discomfort to patients, lack of visualization to validate the hypnogram, and no acknowledgment of differences between delta and slow oscillation deep sleep. This report highlights a spectral scoring approach that addresses all these shortcomings of visual scoring. Past algorithms have used spectral information to help classify traditional visual stages. The current method used the clearly visible spectral patterns to develop new spectral stages, which are similar to but not the same as visual stages. Importantly, spectral scoring delivers both a hypnogram and a whole-night spectrogram, which can be visually inspected to ensure accurate scoring.This study compared traditional visual scoring of 32-channel polysomnography with forehead-only spectral scoring from an EEG patch worn concurrently. The PSG was visually scored by trained technicians and the forehead patch was scored spectrally. Because non-rapid eye movement (NREM) stage divisions in spectral scoring are not based on visual NREM stages, the agreements are not expected to be as high as other automated sleep scoring algorithms. Rather, they are a guide to understanding spectral stages as they relate to the more widely understood visual stages and to emphasize reasons for the differences.The results showed that visual REM was highly recognized as spectral REM (89%). Visual wake was only scored as spectral Wake 47% of the time, partly because of excessive visual scoring of wake during Light and REM sleep. The majority of spectral Light (predominance of spindle power) was scored as N2 (74%), while less N2 was scored as Light (65%), mostly because of incorrect visual staging of Lo Deep sleep due to high-pass filtering. N3 was scored as both Hi Deep (13 Hz power, 42%) and Lo Deep (0–1 Hz power, 39%), constituting a total of 81% of N3.The results show that spectral scoring better identifies clinically relevant physiology at a substantially lower cost and in a more reproducible fashion than visual scoring, supporting further work exploring its use in clinical and research settings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial: Insights in sleep-related movement disorders and parasomnias Efficacy of a telehealth cognitive behavioral therapy for improving sleep and nightmares in children aged 6–17 Insomnia severity and daytime sleepiness in caregivers of advanced age Revitalizing CPAP adherence: lessons from THN study in patients with hypoglossal nerve stimulators From macro to micro: slow-wave sleep and its pivotal health implications
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1