These practice parameters are an update of the previously-published recommendations regarding the indications for polysomnography and related procedures in the diagnosis of sleep disorders. Diagnostic categories include the following: sleep related breathing disorders, other respiratory disorders, narcolepsy, parasomnias, sleep related seizure disorders, restless legs syndrome, periodic limb movement sleep disorder, depression with insomnia, and circadian rhythm sleep disorders. Polysomnography is routinely indicated for the diagnosis of sleep related breathing disorders; for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) titration in patients with sleep related breathing disorders; for the assessment of treatment results in some cases; with a multiple sleep latency test in the evaluation of suspected narcolepsy; in evaluating sleep related behaviors that are violent or otherwise potentially injurious to the patient or others; and in certain atypical or unusual parasomnias. Polysomnography may be indicated in patients with neuromuscular disorders and sleep related symptoms; to assist in the diagnosis of paroxysmal arousals or other sleep disruptions thought to be seizure related; in a presumed parasomnia or sleep related seizure disorder that does not respond to conventional therapy; or when there is a strong clinical suspicion of periodic limb movement sleep disorder. Polysomnography is not routinely indicated to diagnose chronic lung disease; in cases of typical, uncomplicated, and noninjurious parasomnias when the diagnosis is clearly delineated; for patients with seizures who have no specific complaints consistent with a sleep disorder; to diagnose or treat restless legs syndrome; for the diagnosis of circadian rhythm sleep disorders; or to establish a diagnosis of depression.

Characterization of excessive sleepiness is an important task for the sleep clinician, and assessment requires a thorough history and in many cases, objective assessment in the sleep laboratory. These practice parameters were developed to guide the sleep clinician on appropriate clinical use of the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT), and the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT). These recommendations replace those published in 1992 in a position paper produced by the American Sleep Disorders Association. A Task Force of content experts was appointed by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine to perform a comprehensive review of the scientific literature and grade the evidence regarding the clinical use of the MSLT and the MWT. Practice parameters were developed based on this review and in most cases evidence based methods were used to support recommendations. When data were insufficient or inconclusive, the collective opinion of experts was used to support recommendations. These recommendations were developed by the Standards of Practice Committee and reviewed and approved by the Board of Directors of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. The MSLT is indicated as part of the evaluation of patients with suspected narcolepsy and may be useful in the evaluation of patients with suspected idiopathic hypersomnia. The MSLT is not routinely indicated in the initial evaluation and diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, or in assessment of change following treatment with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). The MSLT is not routinely indicated for evaluation of sleepiness in medical and neurological disorders (other than narcolepsy), insomnia, or circadian rhythm disorders. The MWT may be indicated in assessment of individuals in whom the inability to remain awake constitutes a safety issue, or in patients with narcolepsy or idiopathic hypersomnia to assess response to treatment with medications. There is little evidence linking mean sleep latency on the MWT with risk of accidents in real world circumstances. For this reason, the sleep clinician should not rely solely on mean sleep latency as a single indicator of impairment or risk for accidents, but should also rely on clinical judgment. Assessment should involve integration of findings from the clinical history, compliance with treatment, and, in some cases, objective testing using the MWT. These practice parameters also include recommendations for the MSLT and MWT protocols, a discussion of the normative data available for both tests, and a description of issues that need further study.

These practice parameters are an update of the previously published recommendations regarding use of oral appliances in the treatment of snoring and Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA). Oral appliances (OAs) are indicated for use in patients with mild to moderate OSA who prefer them to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, or who do not respond to, are not appropriate candidates for, or who fail treatment attempts with CPAP. Until there is higher quality evidence to suggest efficacy, CPAP is indicated whenever possible for patients with severe OSA before considering OAs. Oral appliances should be fitted by qualified dental personnel who are trained and experienced in the overall care of oral health, the temporomandibular joint, dental occlusion and associated oral structures. Follow-up polysomnography or an attended cardiorespiratory (Type 3) sleep study is needed to verify efficacy, and may be needed when symptoms of OSA worsen or recur. Patients with OSA who are treated with oral appliances should return for follow-up office visits with the dental specialist at regular intervals to monitor patient adherence, evaluate device deterioration or maladjustment, and to evaluate the health of the oral structures and integrity of the occlusion. Regular follow up is also needed to assess the patient for signs and symptoms of worsening OSA. Research to define patient characteristics more clearly for OA acceptance, success, and adherence is needed.

Positive airway pressure (PAP) devices are used to treat patients with sleep related breathing disorders (SRBD) including obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Currently, PAP devices come in three forms: (1) continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), (2) bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP), and (3) automatic self-adjusting positive airway pressure (APAP). After a patient is diagnosed with OSA, the current standard of practice involves performing full, attended polysomnography during which positive pressure is adjusted to determine optimal pressure for maintaining airway patency. This titration is used to find a fixed single pressure for subsequent nightly usage. A task force of the Standards of Practice Committee of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine reviewed the available literature. Based on this review, the Standards of Practice Committee developed these practice parameters as a guideline for using CPAP and BPAP appropriately (an earlier review and practice parameters for APAP was published in 2002). Major conclusions and current recommendations are as follows: 1) A diagnosis of OSA must be established by an acceptable method. 2) CPAP is effective for treating OSA. 3) Full-night, attended studies performed in the laboratory are the preferred approach for titration to determine optimal pressure; however, split-night, diagnostic-titration studies are usually adequate. 4) CPAP usage should be monitored objectively to help assure utilization. 5) Initial CPAP follow-up is recommended during the first few weeks to establish utilization pattern and provide remediation if needed. 6) Longer-term follow-up is recommended yearly or as needed to address mask, machine, or usage problems. 7) Heated humidification and a systematic educational program are recommended to improve CPAP utilization. 8) Some functional outcomes such as subjective sleepiness improve with positive pressure treatment in patients with OSA. 9) CPAP and BPAP therapy are safe; side effects and adverse events are mainly minor and reversible. 10) BPAP may be useful in treating some forms of restrictive lung disease or hypoventilation syndromes associated with hypercapnia.

Actigraphy is a method used to study sleep-wake patterns and circadian rhythms by assessing movement, most commonly of the wrist. These evidence-based practice parameters are an update to the Practice Parameters for the Use of Actigraphy in the Clinical Assessment of Sleep Disorders, published in 1995. These practice parameters were developed by the Standards of Practice Committee and reviewed and approved by the Board of Directors of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Recommendations are based on the accompanying comprehensive review of the medical literature regarding the role of actigraphy, which was developed by a task force commissioned by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. The following recommendations serve as a guide to the appropriate use of actigraphy. Actigraphy is reliable and valid for detecting sleep in normal, healthy populations, but less reliable for detecting disturbed sleep. Although actigraphy is not indicated for the routine diagnosis, assessment, or management of any of the sleep disorders, it may serve as a useful adjunct to routine clinical evaluation of insomnia, circadian-rhythm disorders, and excessive sleepiness, and may be helpful in the assessment of specific aspects of some disorders, such as insomnia and restless legs syndrome/periodic limb movement disorder. The assessment of daytime sleepiness, the demonstration of multiday human-rest activity patterns, and the estimation of sleep-wake patterns are potential uses of actigraphy in clinical situations where other techniques cannot provide similar information (e.g., psychiatric ward patients). Superiority of actigraphy placement on different parts of the body is not currently established. Actigraphy may be useful in characterizing and monitoring circadian rhythm patterns or disturbances in certain special populations (e.g., children, demented individuals), and appears useful as an outcome measure in certain applications and populations. Although actigraphy may be a useful adjunct to portable sleep apnea testing, the use of actigraphy alone in the detection of sleep apnea is not currently established. Specific technical recommendations are discussed, such as using concomitant completion of a sleep log for artifact rejection and timing of lights out and on; conducting actigraphy studies for a minimum of three consecutive 24-hour periods; requiring raw data inspection; permitting some preprocessing of movement counts; stating that epoch lengths up to 1 minute are usually sufficient, except for circadian rhythm assessment; requiring interpretation to be performed manually by visual inspection; and allowing automatic scoring in addition to manual scoring methods.