孕妇阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停筛查工具:扩展和更新的系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 1.7 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL International Journal of Preventive Medicine Pub Date : 2024-08-06 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_88_23
Babak Amra, Masoud Mansouri, Forogh Soltaninejad, Awat Feizi, Marta Kaminska
{"title":"孕妇阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停筛查工具:扩展和更新的系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Babak Amra, Masoud Mansouri, Forogh Soltaninejad, Awat Feizi, Marta Kaminska","doi":"10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_88_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSA) increases in women during pregnancy and negatively affects maternal and fetal outcomes. The updated systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the validity of the Berlin, STOP-Bang, and Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) questionnaires in detecting OSA in pregnant women. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched systematically up to March 2022. After eligible studies inclusion, two independent reviewers extracted demographic and clinical data. Bivariate random effects models were used to estimate the pooled accuracy measures including sensitivity and specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPVs), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve. We included 8 studies including 710 pregnant women with suspected OSA. The performance values of Berlin, STOP-Bang, and ESS questionnaires were as follows: the pooled sensitivity were 61% (95% confidence interval (CI): 40%-80%), 59% (95% CI: 49%-69%), and 29%, (95% CI: 10%-60%); pooled specificity were 61% (95% CI: 42%-78%), 80% (95% CI: 55%-93%), and 80% (95% CI: 50%-94%); pooled PPVs were 60% (95% CI: 0.49-0.72), 73% (95% CI: 61%-85%), and 59% (95% CI: 31%-87%); pooled NPVs were 60% (95% CI: 0.49-0.71), 65% (95% CI: 54%-76%), and 53% (95% CI: 41%-64%); and pooled DORs were 3 (95% CI: 1-5), 6 (95% CI: 2-19), and 2 (95% CI: 1-3), respectively. It seems that the Berlin, STOP-Bang, and ESS questionnaires had poor to moderate sensitivity and specificity in pregnancy, with the ESS showing the worst characteristics. Further studies are required to evaluate the performance of alternative screening methods for OSA in pregnancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":14342,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Preventive Medicine","volume":"15 ","pages":"31"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11376534/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Screening Tools for Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Pregnant Women: An Extended and Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Babak Amra, Masoud Mansouri, Forogh Soltaninejad, Awat Feizi, Marta Kaminska\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_88_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSA) increases in women during pregnancy and negatively affects maternal and fetal outcomes. The updated systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the validity of the Berlin, STOP-Bang, and Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) questionnaires in detecting OSA in pregnant women. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched systematically up to March 2022. After eligible studies inclusion, two independent reviewers extracted demographic and clinical data. Bivariate random effects models were used to estimate the pooled accuracy measures including sensitivity and specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPVs), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve. We included 8 studies including 710 pregnant women with suspected OSA. The performance values of Berlin, STOP-Bang, and ESS questionnaires were as follows: the pooled sensitivity were 61% (95% confidence interval (CI): 40%-80%), 59% (95% CI: 49%-69%), and 29%, (95% CI: 10%-60%); pooled specificity were 61% (95% CI: 42%-78%), 80% (95% CI: 55%-93%), and 80% (95% CI: 50%-94%); pooled PPVs were 60% (95% CI: 0.49-0.72), 73% (95% CI: 61%-85%), and 59% (95% CI: 31%-87%); pooled NPVs were 60% (95% CI: 0.49-0.71), 65% (95% CI: 54%-76%), and 53% (95% CI: 41%-64%); and pooled DORs were 3 (95% CI: 1-5), 6 (95% CI: 2-19), and 2 (95% CI: 1-3), respectively. It seems that the Berlin, STOP-Bang, and ESS questionnaires had poor to moderate sensitivity and specificity in pregnancy, with the ESS showing the worst characteristics. Further studies are required to evaluate the performance of alternative screening methods for OSA in pregnancy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Preventive Medicine\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11376534/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Preventive Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_88_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Preventive Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_88_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

妊娠期妇女阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征(OSA)的发病率会增加,并对孕产妇和胎儿的预后产生负面影响。最新的系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估柏林问卷、STOP-Bang问卷和爱普沃斯嗜睡量表(ESS)问卷在检测孕妇OSA方面的有效性。截至 2022 年 3 月,对 PubMed、Embase 和 Web of Science 进行了系统检索。在纳入符合条件的研究后,两名独立审稿人提取了人口统计学和临床数据。采用双变量随机效应模型来估算汇总的准确性指标,包括敏感性和特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)、诊断几率比(DOR)和接收者操作特征曲线(ROC)。我们共纳入了 8 项研究,包括 710 名疑似 OSA 孕妇。柏林、STOP-Bang 和 ESS 问卷的性能值如下:汇总灵敏度分别为 61%(95% 置信区间 (CI):40%-80%)、59%(95% CI:49%-69%)和 29%(95% CI:10%-60%);汇总特异性分别为 61%(95% CI:42%-78%)、80%(95% CI:55%-93%)和 80%(95% CI:50%-94%);汇总 PPV 分别为 60%(95% CI:0.49-0.72)、73%(95% CI:61%-85%)和 59%(95% CI:31%-87%);集合 NPV 分别为 60%(95% CI:0.49-0.71)、65%(95% CI:54%-76%)和 53%(95% CI:41%-64%);集合 DOR 分别为 3(95% CI:1-5)、6(95% CI:2-19)和 2(95% CI:1-3)。由此看来,柏林、STOP-Bang 和 ESS 问卷在妊娠期的敏感性和特异性方面均处于较差至中等水平,其中 ESS 表现出最差的特征。需要进一步开展研究,以评估其他筛查方法在妊娠期筛查 OSA 的效果。
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
Screening Tools for Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Pregnant Women: An Extended and Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSA) increases in women during pregnancy and negatively affects maternal and fetal outcomes. The updated systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the validity of the Berlin, STOP-Bang, and Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) questionnaires in detecting OSA in pregnant women. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched systematically up to March 2022. After eligible studies inclusion, two independent reviewers extracted demographic and clinical data. Bivariate random effects models were used to estimate the pooled accuracy measures including sensitivity and specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPVs), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve. We included 8 studies including 710 pregnant women with suspected OSA. The performance values of Berlin, STOP-Bang, and ESS questionnaires were as follows: the pooled sensitivity were 61% (95% confidence interval (CI): 40%-80%), 59% (95% CI: 49%-69%), and 29%, (95% CI: 10%-60%); pooled specificity were 61% (95% CI: 42%-78%), 80% (95% CI: 55%-93%), and 80% (95% CI: 50%-94%); pooled PPVs were 60% (95% CI: 0.49-0.72), 73% (95% CI: 61%-85%), and 59% (95% CI: 31%-87%); pooled NPVs were 60% (95% CI: 0.49-0.71), 65% (95% CI: 54%-76%), and 53% (95% CI: 41%-64%); and pooled DORs were 3 (95% CI: 1-5), 6 (95% CI: 2-19), and 2 (95% CI: 1-3), respectively. It seems that the Berlin, STOP-Bang, and ESS questionnaires had poor to moderate sensitivity and specificity in pregnancy, with the ESS showing the worst characteristics. Further studies are required to evaluate the performance of alternative screening methods for OSA in pregnancy.

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
International Journal of Preventive Medicine
International Journal of Preventive Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: International Journal of Preventive Medicine, a publication of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, is a peer-reviewed online journal with Continuous print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.ijpvmjournal.net. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository. The journal will cover technical and clinical studies related to health, ethical and social issues in field of Preventive Medicine. Articles with clinical interest and implications will be given preference.
期刊最新文献
A Case-control Study on the Association of Fruit and Vegetable Consumption with Risk of Breast Cancer. Comparison of Daily Dose of 400 and 600 Units of Vitamin D in the Prevention of Osteopenia of Prematurity in Infants with a Gestational Age of Less Than and Equal to 32 Weeks. Designing an Impact-Oriented Model of Research and Technology Evaluation: An Experience of I.R.Iran. Economic Burden of Hepatitis B at Different Stages of the Disease: A Systematic Review Study. Information Capsule: A New Approach for Summarizing Medical Information.
×
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