Advertisement

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 266, Issue 2, pp 293–296 | Cite as

The annoyance of snoring

  • Alfred DreherEmail author
  • Tobias Rader
  • Martin Patscheider
  • Christine Klemens
  • Michael Schmidt
  • Fiona Baker
  • Richard de la Chaux
Miscellaneous

Abstract

Is the annoyance of snoring a reliable tool for the measurement of snoring or does it depend more on the sensitivity of the listener? During an automatized hearing experiment, 550 representative snoring sequences, recorded during polysomnography, were randomly presented to ten examiners for the evaluation of their annoyance (0–100). The mean annoyance score for each snoring sound and the covariance parameters for rater and snoring sounds (restricted maximum likelihood method) were calculated. The average annoyance rating of all snoring sequences was 63.9 ± 23.0, the most acceptable snoring sequence rating was 49.2 ± 28.0, the most annoying rating was 77.7 ± 16.4. The covariance parameters were estimated as 28.7% for the rater and 22.3% for the snoring sound. Our results show that the listeners’ noise sensitivity is at least equally relevant for the snoring annoyance as the snoring sound itself.

Keywords

Snoring Annoyance Psychoacoustics 

Notes

Conflict of interest statement

None

References

  1. 1.
    Ohayon MM, Guilleminault C, Priest RG, Caulet M (1997) Snoring and breathing pauses during sleep: telephone interview survey of a United Kingdom population sample. BMJ 314:860–863PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Young T, Palta M, Dempsey J, Skatrud J, Weber S, Badr S (1993) The occurrence of sleep-disordered breathing among middle-aged adults. N Engl J Med 328:1230–1235. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199304293281704 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McNichlas WT, Bonsigore MR (2007) Sleep apnoea as an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease: current evidence, basic mechanisms and research priorities. Eur Respir J 29:156–178. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00027406 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sassani A, Findley LJ, Kryger M, Goldlust E, George C, Davidson TM (2004) Reducing motor-vehicle collisions, costs, and fatalities by treating obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Sleep 27:453–458PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rechtschaffen A, Kales A (1973) A manual of standardized terminology, Techniques and Scoring System for Sleep Stages of Human Subjects. University of California, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass Correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin 86:420–428. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fairbanks DN (1990) Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty complications and avoidance strategies. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 102:239–245PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fujita S (1984) UPPP for sleep apnea and snoring. Ear Nose Throat J 63:227–235PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kamami YV (1990) Laser CO2 for snoring–preliminary results. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 44:451–456PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Terris DJ, Coker JF, Thomas AJ, Chavoya M (2002) Preliminary findings from a prospective, randomized trial of two palatal operations for sleep disoredered breathing. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 127:315–23. doi: 10.1067/mhn.2002.128345 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Larrosa F, Hernandez L, Morello A, Ballester E, Quinto L, Montserrat JM (2004) Laser-assisted uvulopalatoplasty for snoring: does it meet the expectations. Eur Respir J 24:66–70. doi: 10.1183/09031936.04.00082903 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zwicker E, Fastl H (1990) Psychoacoustics. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alfred Dreher
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tobias Rader
    • 1
  • Martin Patscheider
    • 1
  • Christine Klemens
    • 1
  • Michael Schmidt
    • 2
  • Fiona Baker
    • 3
  • Richard de la Chaux
    • 1
  1. 1.ENT Department, Klinikum GroßhadernLudwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  2. 2.IBE, Ludwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  3. 3.Stanford Research InstituteMenlo ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations