CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 696Obstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchSleep and related disordersNeuroscience of respiration and sleep

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The New AASM Criteria for Scoring Hypopneas: Impact on the Apnea Hypopnea Index

Open access
Ruehland, Warren R., Rochford, Peter D., O’Donoghue, Fergal J., Pierce, Robert J., Singh, Parmjit, Thornton, Andrew T.·2009·SLEEP
DOI 10.1093/sleep/32.2.150PMC PMC2635578
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare apnea-hypopnea indices (AHIs) derived using 3 standard hypopnea definitions published by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM); and to examine the impact of hypopnea definition differences on the measured prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). DESIGN: Retrospective review of previously scored in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG). SETTING: Two tertiary-hospital clinical sleep laboratories. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: 328 consecutive patients investigated for OSA during a 3-month period. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: AHIs were originally calculated using previous AASM hypopnea scoring criteria (AHI(Chicago)), requiring either >50% airflow reduction or a lesser airflow reduction with associated >3% oxygen desaturation or arousal. AHIs using the "recommended" (AHI(Rec)) and the "alternative" (AHI(Alt)) hypopnea definitions of the AASM Manual for Scoring of Sleep and Associated Events were then derived in separate passes of the previously scored data. In this process, hypopneas that did not satisfy the stricter hypopnea definition criteria were removed. For AHI(Rec), hypopneas were required to have > or =30% airflow reduction and > or =4% desaturation; and for AHI(Alt), hypopneas were required to have > or =50% airflow reduction and > or =3% desaturation or arousal. The median AHI(Rec) was approximately 30% of the median AHI(Chicago), whereas the median AHI(Alt), was approximately 60% of the AHI(Chicago), with large, AHI-dependent, patient-specific differences observed. Equivalent cut-points for AHI(Rec) and AHI(Alt), compared to AHI(Chicago) cut-points of 5, 15, and 30/h were established with receiver operator curves (ROC). These cut-points were also approximately 30% of AHI(Chicago) using AHI(Rec) and 60% of AHI(Chicago) using AHI(Alt). Failure to adjust cut-points for the new criteria would result in approximately 40% of patients previously classifled as positive for OSA using AHI(Chicago) being negative using AHI(Rec) and 25% being negative using AHI(Alt). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that using different published standard hypopnea definitions leads to marked differences in AHI. These results provide insight to clinicians and researchers in interpreting results obtained using different published standard hypopnea definitions, and they suggest that consideration should be given to revising the current scoring recommendations to include a single standardized hypopnea definition.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sleep/32.2.150

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 696

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Ruehland, W. R., Rochford, P. D., O’Donoghue, F. J., Pierce, R. J., Singh, P., & Thornton, A. T.
Affiliations
  • Institute for Breathing and Sleep (AU)
  • Royal Adelaide Hospital (AU)
ORCID
Venue
SLEEP
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-02
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
150-157
ISSN
  • 0161-8105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-9109
DOI
10.1093/sleep/32.2.150
PMC
PMC2635578
OpenAlex
W95419338
Cited by
696
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 66 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 74 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 39
FWCI
22.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SLEEP (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Neuroscience of respiration and sleep
Keywords
apnea-hypopnea index, airflow reduction, oxygen desaturation, arousal, sleep apnea severity classification, diagnostic thresholds, polysomnography scoring, underdiagnosis of sleep apnea, receiver operating characteristic
MeSH terms
Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen, Reference Values, Retrospective Studies, United States, Victoria, Polysomnography, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Sleep Apnea, Obstructive

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review