2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0300-2896(15)30226-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validación de un sistema portátil de registro de tres canales (Oxyflow, Edentec) para el diagnóstico del síndrome de apnea del sueño

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, there is a paucity of data comparing the available PM devices with one other. Some of the PMs that have been validated against PSG include ApneaLink,[ 23 ] Edentec,[ 24 25 26 ] PolyG,[ 27 ] AutoSet,[ 28 29 30 31 32 ] Embletta,[ 33 ] Sibel home,[ 34 ] Bedbugg,[ 35 ] NovaSom,[ 36 ] WatchPAT,[ 37 38 39 40 ] SNAP,[ 41 ] SOMNOcheck,[ 42 ] Stardust II,[ 43 ] Apnomonitor,[ 44 ] and Apnea Risk Evaluation System (ARES)[ 45 ] [ Table 3 ]. The results of the studies conducted with some of these devices are discussed in detail below.…”
Section: Portable Monitors: Review Of Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, there is a paucity of data comparing the available PM devices with one other. Some of the PMs that have been validated against PSG include ApneaLink,[ 23 ] Edentec,[ 24 25 26 ] PolyG,[ 27 ] AutoSet,[ 28 29 30 31 32 ] Embletta,[ 33 ] Sibel home,[ 34 ] Bedbugg,[ 35 ] NovaSom,[ 36 ] WatchPAT,[ 37 38 39 40 ] SNAP,[ 41 ] SOMNOcheck,[ 42 ] Stardust II,[ 43 ] Apnomonitor,[ 44 ] and Apnea Risk Evaluation System (ARES)[ 45 ] [ Table 3 ]. The results of the studies conducted with some of these devices are discussed in detail below.…”
Section: Portable Monitors: Review Of Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Para ello, analizaron 62 sujetos y obtuvieron un AUC de 0.90 para un IAH ≥ 10 e/h, 0.94 para un IAH ≥ 15 e/h y 0.96 para un IAH ≥ 30 e/h. La lectura manual no fue mejor que el análisis automático[146].Posteriormente, Heneghan et al en el año 2008 realizaron un estudio prospectivo enel que combinaron el ECG y la oximetría (Holter-oximeter) comparado con la PSG, realizadas ambas pruebas en el hospital, en una población compuesta por 59 adultos. Se realizó un análisis automático, alcanzando una sensibilidad del 95.8% y una especificidad del 100%, con un LR+ > 20 y una razón de verosimilitud negativa (LR-) de 0.04.…”
unclassified