Use of the Clinical Global Impression scale in sleep apnea patients - Results from the ESADA database

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00159816%3A_____%2F19%3A00070871" target="_blank" >RIV/00159816:_____/19:00070871 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/65269705:_____/19:00070871

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389945718303708?via%3Dihub#fn1" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389945718303708?via%3Dihub#fn1</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sleep.2018.10.028" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.sleep.2018.10.028</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Use of the Clinical Global Impression scale in sleep apnea patients - Results from the ESADA database

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Objective/Background: The Clinical Global Impression scale (CGI) reflects the clinician&apos;s assessment of the disease impact on patient&apos;s global functioning. We assessed predictors of CGI scale rating in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Patients/Methods: Consecutive patients with suspected OSA (n = 7581) were identified in the European Sleep Apnea Database (ESADA). Anthropometrics, comorbidities, apnea severity obtained by polygraphy or polysomnography, and daytime sleepiness [Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)] were assessed. The CGI 7-point scale was completed at the end of the diagnostic process (CGI-severity, ie, CGI-S) and, in a sub-population, at treatment follow-up (CGI-Improvement). Results: CGI-S was rated mild to moderate in 44% of patients. CGI rating at any given apnea intensity was worse in women than in men (p &lt; 0.01). Patients undergoing polygraphy (n = 5075) were more frequently rated as severely ill compared to those studied with polysomnography (19.0% vs 13.0%, p &lt; 0.001). In patients aged &lt;= 65 years, CGI scoring was generally better than in the elderly despite a similar degree of OSA (eg, &apos;normal, not ill&apos; 24.2% vs 15.3%, p &lt; 0.01, respectively). Independent predictors of CGI rating included age, BMI, AHI, ESS, cardio-metabolic comorbidities, and diagnosis based on polygraphy. CGI-improvement rating (Beta = -0.406, p &lt; 0.01) was superior to sleep apnea severity or ESS-score (Beta = 0.052 and -0.021, p = 0.154 and 0.538 respectively) at baseline for prediction of good CPAP compliance at follow-up. Conclusions: CGI rating is confounded by gender, age class and the type of sleep diagnostic method. As OSA phenotypes differ, CGI may contribute as a clinical tool to reflect the significance of clinical disease. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Use of the Clinical Global Impression scale in sleep apnea patients - Results from the ESADA database

Popis výsledku anglicky

Objective/Background: The Clinical Global Impression scale (CGI) reflects the clinician&apos;s assessment of the disease impact on patient&apos;s global functioning. We assessed predictors of CGI scale rating in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Patients/Methods: Consecutive patients with suspected OSA (n = 7581) were identified in the European Sleep Apnea Database (ESADA). Anthropometrics, comorbidities, apnea severity obtained by polygraphy or polysomnography, and daytime sleepiness [Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)] were assessed. The CGI 7-point scale was completed at the end of the diagnostic process (CGI-severity, ie, CGI-S) and, in a sub-population, at treatment follow-up (CGI-Improvement). Results: CGI-S was rated mild to moderate in 44% of patients. CGI rating at any given apnea intensity was worse in women than in men (p &lt; 0.01). Patients undergoing polygraphy (n = 5075) were more frequently rated as severely ill compared to those studied with polysomnography (19.0% vs 13.0%, p &lt; 0.001). In patients aged &lt;= 65 years, CGI scoring was generally better than in the elderly despite a similar degree of OSA (eg, &apos;normal, not ill&apos; 24.2% vs 15.3%, p &lt; 0.01, respectively). Independent predictors of CGI rating included age, BMI, AHI, ESS, cardio-metabolic comorbidities, and diagnosis based on polygraphy. CGI-improvement rating (Beta = -0.406, p &lt; 0.01) was superior to sleep apnea severity or ESS-score (Beta = 0.052 and -0.021, p = 0.154 and 0.538 respectively) at baseline for prediction of good CPAP compliance at follow-up. Conclusions: CGI rating is confounded by gender, age class and the type of sleep diagnostic method. As OSA phenotypes differ, CGI may contribute as a clinical tool to reflect the significance of clinical disease. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30210 - Clinical neurology

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Sleep medicine

ISSN

1389-9457

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

59

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

JUL 2019

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

10

Strana od-do

56-65

Kód UT WoS článku

000471665700011

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85058227852