|
1000
|
Abstract/Summary
|
-
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Purpose of Review</jats:title>
<jats:p>The increasing demand for sleep diagnostic studies represents a challenge for many healthcare systems. Home polysomnography (<jats:italic>h</jats:italic>PSG), either set up by a technician or self-applied by the patient, provides comprehensive sleep signals and has the potential to replace in-lab sleep studies in a large number of cases.The aim of this study is to assess the existing evidence regarding the technical feasibility of <jats:italic>h</jats:italic>PSG in a systematic review. A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar to identify relevant research. Using a priori-defined inclusion criteria, studies were reviewed by three researchers, and a quality assessment was conducted. Relevant data were extracted, and the pooled failure rate with <jats:italic>h</jats:italic>PSG was computed. Additional subgroup analyses were conducted to further assess factors influencing technical feasibility.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Recent Findings</jats:title>
<jats:p>Thirty studies totaling 14,465 patients were included (mean sample size 482 ± 1289 participants). Common deployment models for <jats:italic>h</jats:italic>PSG were at-home application by a technician (58%) and technician-led in-hospital set-up (31%), followed by at-home self-application by the patient (11%). Technical failure rate across the studies ranged from 0 to 23.4%, with a pooled failure rate of 7.8% (95% CI 5.5–10.1%). Depending on deployment models, failure rates varied slightly. Failures of <jats:italic>h</jats:italic>PSG were largely related to signal acquisition. No studies reported adverse events from <jats:italic>h</jats:italic>PSG. Patient preferences were assessed by eleven studies, with 56% (range 22–95%) preferring <jats:italic>h</jats:italic>PSG over in-lab recording.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Summary</jats:title>
<jats:p>Based on the research identified for this review, home PSG is safe and technically feasible with relatively low failure rates. Further research is required to better understand decision-making with this tool in comparison to other sleep diagnostic procedures.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
|
|
1000
|
Hinweis
|
-
DeepGreen-ID: 9f2c678776f445b7b9195301d3085d26 ; metadata provieded by: DeepGreen (https://www.oa-deepgreen.de/api/v1/), LIVIVO search scope life sciences (http://z3950.zbmed.de:6210/livivo), Crossref Unified Resource API (https://api.crossref.org/swagger-ui/index.html), to.science.api (https://frl.publisso.de/), ZDB JSON-API (beta) (https://zeitschriftendatenbank.de/api/), lobid - Dateninfrastruktur für Bibliotheken (https://lobid.org/resources/search)
|
