Purpose

Different devices have been used for the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), which differ in the number of sensors used. The numerous sensors used in more complex sleep studies such as in-lab polysomnography may influence body position during sleep. We hypothesized that patients submitted to in-lab polysomnography (PSG) would spend more time in the supine position than patients submitted to an ambulatory Portable Monitor (PM) sleep study.

Methods

Body position during PSG and PM studies was compared among two distinct groups of patients matched for age, body-mass index (BMI), apnea–hypopnea index (AHI), and gender. Predictors of time spent in the supine position were determined using a multiple linear regression model.

Results

Of 478 participants who underwent either PSG or PM studies, mean age: 61[43–66] years; males: 43.9%; BMI: 28.4[26.1–31.1]kg/m²; AHI 14[7–27] events/hour). Participants who underwent PSG studies spent more time in the supine position (41[16–68]% than participants who underwent PM studies (34[16–51]%), P = 0.014. Participants with OSA spent more time in the supine position than participants without OSA, both among the PSG and PM groups P < 0.05). Gender, BMI, OSA severity, and sleep study type were independent predictors of time spent in the supine position.

Conclusion

In-lab PSG may increase time spent in the supine position and overestimate OSA severity compared to a PM sleep study. OSA diagnosis is also associated with increased time spent in the supine position. The potential influence on the sleeping position should be taken into account when choosing among the different sleep study types for OSA diagnosis.

中文翻译：

---

用于阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停诊断的设备对体位的影响：多导睡眠图与便携式监护仪的比较

目的

不同的设备已用于阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停 (OSA) 的诊断，所使用的传感器数量不同。在实验室多导睡眠图等更复杂的睡眠研究中使用的众多传感器可能会影响睡眠期间的身体姿势。我们假设接受实验室内多导睡眠图 (PSG) 的患者比接受动态便携式监测仪 (PM) 睡眠研究的患者在仰卧位的时间更长。

方法

在年龄、体重指数 (BMI)、呼吸暂停低通气指数 (AHI) 和性别相匹配的两组不同患者中比较 PSG 和 PM 研究期间的体位。使用多元线性回归模型确定仰卧位时间的预测因子。

结果

在接受过 PSG 或 PM 研究的 478 名参与者中，平均年龄：61[43–66] 岁；男性：43.9%；BMI：28.4[26.1–31.1]kg/m ²；AHI 14[7–27] 事件/小时）。接受 PSG 研究的参与者在仰卧位上花费的时间更多（41[16–68]% 比接受 PM 研究的参与者 (34[16–51]%)，P = 0.014。患有OSA 的参与者在仰卧位上花费的时间更多比没有 OSA 的参与者，在 PSG 和 PM 组中P  < 0.05）。性别、BMI、OSA 严重程度和睡眠研究类型是仰卧位时间的独立预测因素。

结论

与 PM 睡眠研究相比，实验室 PSG 可能会增加仰卧位的时间并高估 OSA 的严重程度。OSA 诊断也与仰卧位时间增加有关。在为 OSA 诊断选择不同的睡眠研究类型时，应考虑对睡眠姿势的潜在影响。