Benes Heike, von Eye Alexander, Kohnen Ralf
Somni bene Institute for Medical Research and Sleep Medicine, Schwerin and Neurology Department, University of Rostock, Germany.
Sleep Med. 2009 May;10(5):524-30. doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2008.06.007. Epub 2008 Nov 8.
In accordance with the diagnostic criteria of the International Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) Study Group, the diagnosis of RLS is exclusively based on subjective information. Patients must report an urge to move the legs (and arms) with or without unpleasant sensations which is engendered by rest, relieved by movement, and worse in the evening or at night than during the day (essential criteria). Objective information such as excessive periodic leg movements, positive response to dopaminergic medication, family history of RLS or findings of a neurological examination cannot substitute any of the essential criteria but are considered both supportive for the RLS diagnosis and important for decisions on differential diagnoses. In this article, we report a systematic empirical analysis of the accuracy of diagnostic decisions based on all diagnostic criteria being either "essential" or "non-essential."
We re-analyzed data from a validation study for the RLS Diagnostic Index, in which ten items related to diagnostic criteria were compared with an expert diagnosis of RLS (n = 86) and other sleep-related diagnoses (n = 93). The value of individual diagnostic criteria and features of RLS predictive of the expert diagnoses were analyzed with logistic regression models by increasing the set of diagnostic criteria stepwise based on delta-chi(2) tests.
The essential diagnostic criteria share a large amount of variance in the prediction of the expert diagnosis. Three of the four essential criteria (urge to move the legs, which is engendered by rest and worse in the evening) almost completely determine the expert diagnosis. However, adding response to dopaminergic medication to the set of the essential criteria increased the effect size in the logistic regression model from 69.4% to 88.4%, indicating a relevant improvement of the accuracy in supporting or excluding the diagnosis of RLS.
On the basis of our exploratory empirical analysis we conclude that the accuracy of diagnostic decision making in patients suspicious for RLS can be improved by inclusion of objective information. Response to dopaminergics is the most important criterion which both supports the "true" diagnosis of RLS, if present, and is also relevant to exclude mimics of RLS.
根据国际不宁腿综合征(RLS)研究组的诊断标准,RLS的诊断完全基于主观信息。患者必须报告有腿部(及手臂)活动的冲动,伴有或不伴有因休息产生的不愉快感觉,活动后缓解,且在傍晚或夜间比白天更严重(基本标准)。诸如过度周期性腿部运动、对多巴胺能药物的阳性反应、RLS家族史或神经学检查结果等客观信息不能替代任何基本标准,但被认为对RLS诊断有支持作用,且对鉴别诊断的决策很重要。在本文中,我们报告了基于所有“基本”或“非基本”诊断标准的诊断决策准确性的系统实证分析。
我们重新分析了RLS诊断指数验证研究的数据,其中将与诊断标准相关的十个项目与RLS专家诊断(n = 86)和其他睡眠相关诊断(n = 93)进行了比较。通过基于delta-chi(2)检验逐步增加诊断标准集,使用逻辑回归模型分析了个体诊断标准的价值以及预测专家诊断的RLS特征。
基本诊断标准在预测专家诊断方面共享大量方差。四个基本标准中的三个(腿部活动冲动,由休息产生且在傍晚更严重)几乎完全决定了专家诊断。然而,将对多巴胺能药物的反应添加到基本标准集中,逻辑回归模型中的效应量从69.4%增加到88.4%,表明在支持或排除RLS诊断方面准确性有了显著提高。
基于我们的探索性实证分析,我们得出结论,纳入客观信息可以提高疑似RLS患者诊断决策的准确性。对多巴胺能药物的反应是最重要的标准,既支持RLS的“真正”诊断(如果存在),也与排除RLS的模仿疾病相关。