Original Article

Sleep and Breathing

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 163-167

First online:

Assessment of the test–retest reliability of laboratory polysomnography

  • Daniel J. LevendowskiAffiliated withAdvanced Brain Monitoring, Inc. Email author 
  • , Nadene ZackAffiliated withCypress Biosciences, Inc.
  • , Srini RaoAffiliated withCypress Biosciences, Inc.
  • , Keith WongAffiliated withWoolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney
  • , Michael GendreauAffiliated withCypress Biosciences, Inc.
  • , Jay KranzlerAffiliated withCypress Biosciences, Inc.
  • , Timothy ZavoraAffiliated withAdvanced Brain Monitoring, Inc.
  • , Philip R. WestbrookAffiliated withAdvanced Brain Monitoring, Inc.

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

Statement of the problem

When conducting a treatment intervention study, it is assumed that a level of reliability can be obtained from the measurement tool such that the outcome can be reasonably assessed.

Purpose of study

Investigate the reliability of laboratory polysomnography, the gold standard for assessment of treatment outcomes for obstructive sleep apnea, at a 1-month interval.

Materials and Methods

In a clinical trial of 118 patients recruited to assess the effects of a pharmaceutical treatment intervention, a subset of 20 patients designated as placebo controls completed two polysomnography studies, one at baseline and one at least one month later.

Results

The correlation between the overall Apnea/Hypopnea indices from the two polysomnography (PSG) studies was poor (r = 0.44) and the results were biased, with a mean increase of seven events per hour on night 2. Twenty-five percent of the subjects had an increase greater than 20 events/hour on night 2 and only 45% of participants had a night-to-night difference of ≤5 events/hour. The correlation between overall apnea indexes for nights 1 and 2 (r = 0.61) was improved, compared to the overall apnea/hypopnea indexes. The correlation in sleep efficiency across the two nights was relatively week (r = 0.52) but significant. The correlations between nights 1 and 2 for the percentage of time supine (r = 0.70) and the supine apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) (r = 0.69) were similar and highly significant. The correlation for the non-supine AHI was only 0.25

Conclusions

In this study, the reliability of a single-night PSG in measuring treatment outcome was compromised as a result of the large night-to-night variability of subjects’ obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Studies employing the AHI as an outcome need to be adequately powered with respect to the inherent night-to-night variability in the measurement. When assessing treatment intervention outcomes, there may be benefit from the acquisition and averaging of multiple nights of data in order to mitigate the inherent night-to-night variability of OSA and improve the accuracy of the outcome assessment.

Keywords

Polysomnography Repeated measures Reliability Treatment outcome Case finding