IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0177289.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Age, gender, neck circumference, and Epworth sleepiness scale do not predict obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): The challenge to predict OSA in advanced COPD

Author

Listed:
  • Xavier Soler
  • Shu-Yi Liao
  • Jose Maria Marin
  • Geraldo Lorenzi-Filho
  • Rachel Jen
  • Pamela DeYoung
  • Robert L Owens
  • Andrew L Ries
  • Atul Malhotra

Abstract

The combination of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. We hypothesized that predictors of OSA among patients with COPD may be distinct from OSA in the general population. Therefore, we investigated associations between traditional OSA risk factors (e.g. age), and sleep questionnaires [e.g. Epworth Sleepiness Scale] in 44 patients with advanced COPD. As a second aim we proposed a pilot, simplified screening test for OSA in patients with COPD. In a prospective, observational study of patients enrolled in the UCSD Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program we collected baseline characteristics, cardiovascular events (e.g. atrial fibrillation), and sleep questionnaires [e.g. Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)]. For the pilot questionnaire, a BMI ≥25 kg/m2 and the presence of cardiovascular disease were used to construct the pilot screening test. Male: 59%; OSA 66%. FEV1 (mean ± SD) = 41.0±18.2% pred., FEV1/FVC = 41.5±12.7%]. Male gender, older age, and large neck circumference were not associated with OSA. Also, Epworth Sleepiness Scale and the STOP-Bang questionnaire were not associated with OSA in univariate logistic regression. In contrast, BMI ≥25 kg/m2 (OR = 3.94, p = 0.04) and diagnosis of cardiovascular disease (OR = 5.06, p = 0.03) were significantly associated with OSA [area under curve (AUC) = 0.74]. The pilot COPD-OSA test (OR = 5.28, p = 0.05) and STOP-Bang questionnaire (OR = 5.13, p = 0.03) were both associated with OSA in Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis. The COPD-OSA test had the best AUC (0.74), sensitivity (92%), and specificity (83%). A ten-fold cross-validation validated our results.We found that traditional OSA predictors (e.g. gender, Epworth score) did not perform well in patients with more advanced COPD. Our pilot test may be an easy to implement instrument to screen for OSA. However, a larger validation study is necessary before further clinical implementation is warranted.

Suggested Citation

  • Xavier Soler & Shu-Yi Liao & Jose Maria Marin & Geraldo Lorenzi-Filho & Rachel Jen & Pamela DeYoung & Robert L Owens & Andrew L Ries & Atul Malhotra, 2017. "Age, gender, neck circumference, and Epworth sleepiness scale do not predict obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): The challenge to predict ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-12, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0177289
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177289
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177289&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0177289?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0177289. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.