Automatic and manual scoring differences and results in polysomnography

OSAS is the most common type of sleep disorders. Polysomnography is the gold standard in the diagnosis of OSAS. PSG assessment can be done manually and automatically. Manual scoring results are more subjective and later results. In addition, there are deficiencies in the automatic scoring of sensitivity and specificity. The aim of this study is to determine the assessment of manual and automatic differences. The study included 120 patients admitted to the AUTF KBB clinic with symptoms of OSAS. The first 30 of these patients, AHİ <5, the second 30 5 30 form. PSG recordings, the electrodes are placed according to the international 10-20 system using 44-channel E-series (Compumedics, Abbotsford, VIC, Australia) were made with the device. Participants 24 women and 96 men. The youngest patient was 21, the oldest patient was 74 years old. The average age of 46.75 and 29.74 average body mass index is. Report PSG total sleep time, sleep efficiency, sleep latency, REM latency, REM, Stage 1-2-3, obstructive apnea, massive apnea, central sleep apnea, AHİ REM, AHİ NREM, the total AHİ, supine AHİ, RDI, aurosal index REM, aurosal index NREM, aurosal index total, alertness, O2 saturation, the lowest O2 saturation, O2 saturation, and the average percentage of 90% compared to under saturation. Automatic staging 93.33% sensitivity, specificity 98,88% form. As a result of the study; most of the automatic scoring of sleep parameters incorrectly evaluated with respect to registration, incorrect diagnoses and incorrect treatments applied were laid. Manual scoring is more difficult than automated scoring and results are more longer than period of time. Despite all of this the manual scoring more successful than automatic scoring