儿童睡眠障碍量表在唇腭裂儿童阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停诊断中的效能
Performance of Children's Sleep Disturbance Scale for the Diagnosis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Children with Cleft Lip and Palate.
文献信息
| PMID | 42974719 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Letícia Vieira Crispim |
| 作者单位 | Graduate Program and Department of Medicine, School of Medicine of Bauru (FMBRU), University of São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil. |
| 期刊 | The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association |
| SCI 分区 | Q3 |
| IF | 2.1 |
| 研究类型 | 临床研究 · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 鼻科 |
中文摘要
目的： 评估儿童睡眠障碍量表（SDSC）结果与多导睡眠图参数之间的关联，以及其睡眠呼吸障碍（SBD）和日间过度嗜睡（EDS）分量表在识别非综合征型唇裂相关疾病儿童阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停（OSA）方面的诊断效能。
设计： 前瞻性、分析性、横断面诊断研究。
地点： 三级颅面转诊中心。
患者、参与者： 年龄3岁8个月至13岁的非综合征型唇裂伴腭裂或孤立性腭裂儿童。42例接受多导睡眠图检查；38例有有效记录，37例具有完整的问卷与多导睡眠图配对数据。
主要结局指标： SDSC评分与多导睡眠图参数之间的关联；SBD和EDS分量表识别PSG定义的OSA（呼吸暂停低通气指数≥1次/小时）的敏感性、特异性、预测值和准确性。
结果： 在38例有有效记录的参与者中，27例（71.1%）被识别出OSA，且以轻度为主。SDSC总分及各分量表评分与多导睡眠图参数无显著相关性。SBD分量表的敏感性为38.5%，特异性为72.7%；EDS分量表的敏感性为23.1%，特异性为54.5%。
结论： SDSC结果与多导睡眠图的一致性有限，SBD和EDS分量表无法可靠地识别或排除OSA。SDSC可通过描述照护者报告的症状来补充临床评估，但多导睡眠图仍是客观诊断和严重程度分类所必需的。
英文摘要
ObjectiveTo evaluate associations between Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC) findings and polysomnographic parameters and the diagnostic performance of its Sleep Breathing Disorders (SBD) and Excessive Daytime Sleepiness (EDS) subscales for identifying obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in children with non-syndromic cleft conditions.DesignProspective, analytical, cross-sectional diagnostic study.SettingTertiary craniofacial referral center.Patients, ParticipantsChildren aged 3 years 8 months to 13 years with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate or isolated cleft palate. Forty-two underwent polysomnography; 38 had valid recordings and 37 had complete paired questionnaire and polysomnographic data.Main Outcome Measure(s)Associations between SDSC scores and polysomnographic parameters; sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy of the SBD and EDS subscales for identifying PSG-defined OSA (apnea-hypopnea index ≥1 event/h).ResultsOSA was identified in 27 of 38 participants (71.1%) with valid recordings and was predominantly mild. SDSC total and subscale scores were not significantly correlated with polysomnographic parameters. The SBD subscale had sensitivity of 38.5% and specificity of 72.7%; the EDS subscale had sensitivity of 23.1% and specificity of 54.5%.ConclusionsSDSC findings showed limited agreement with polysomnography, and the SBD and EDS subscales could not reliably identify or exclude OSA. The SDSC may complement clinical assessment by characterizing caregiver-reported symptoms, but polysomnography remains necessary for objective diagnosis and severity classification.