TY - JOUR T1 - Reliability evaluation of sleep studies scoring JF - ERJ Open Research JO - erjor DO - 10.1183/23120541.sleepandbreathing-2017.P7 VL - 3 IS - suppl 1 SP - P7 AU - Vasiliki Paschidou AU - Sakis Gounidis AU - Christos Lilios AU - Emanuelle Petinidou AU - Maroula Papacharalambous Y1 - 2017/04/01 UR - http://openres.ersjournals.com/content/3/suppl_1/P7.abstract N2 - Aim to measure the reliability in scoring sleep polygraphy studies in our sleep lab and improve it with continuous education and training in scoring rules.Methods in our sleep lab six scorers are responsible for scoring sleep studies. All have over 5 years experience in scoring studies but only one is credited as a sleep technician by ESRS. Our sleep lab follows AASM scoring rules. All scorers scored four randomly selected studies and each AHI was accepted as reliable if it lay within the +/-10% of the average AHI (according to the coefficient variation indicator CV ). Scoring took place blindly, each scorer being unaware of the others' results. A training meeting followed, where the scoring rules were reviewed and four additional studies were given to the team for scoring .Results the first four studies were found to be reliable as they lay between 3.4-7.6% of the team's average AHI. The next four studies were also found to be reliable after reviewing the rules (CV 5.9-9.4% for AHI). Although there was concordance among the scorers' results in AHI , significant deviation was noticed in scoring the various respiratory events. As expected, great difference was noticed in scoring apneas (CV 3.9-22.1% for AI) and hypopneas (CV 13.4-49.4% for HI), but surprisingly, even greater difference was apparent in scoring central and mixed apneas in all eight studies (CV 30.5-80% for central apneas and CV 19.6-91.3% for mixed apneas). A meeting with the team followed to clarify the reasons for such deviation. In all cases, bad signals were the cause and the use of alternative signals led to these results.Conclusion the reliability of a sleep lab results should be maintained by regular testing and evaluation of scorers and the frequent review of scoring rules. ER -