Prevalence and Course of Idiopathic Hypersomnia in the Wisconsin Sleep Cohort Study
Résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) is a CNS disorder of hypersomnolence of unknown etiology. Due to the requirement for objective sleep testing to diagnose the disorder, there are currently no population-based estimates of the prevalence of IH nor data regarding the longitudinal course of IH in naturalistic settings. METHODS: Subjective and objective data from the Wisconsin Sleep Cohort study were used to identify cases with probable IH from participants with polysomnography and multiple sleep latency test data. Demographic, polysomnographic, and symptom-level data were compared between those with and without IH. Longitudinal trajectories of daytime sleepiness among those with IH were assessed to evaluate symptom persistence or remission over time. RESULTS: < 0.0001). Consistent with inclusion/exclusion criteria, cases with IH had more severe sleepiness and sleep propensity, despite similar or longer sleep times. Longitudinal data (spanning 12.1 ± 4.3 years) demonstrated a chronic course of sleepiness for most of the cases with IH, though pathologic somnolence remitted in roughly 40% of cases. DISCUSSION: These results demonstrate IH is more common in the working population than generally assumed with a prevalence on par with other common neurologic and psychiatric conditions. Further efforts to identify and diagnose those impaired by unexplained daytime somnolence may help clarify the causes of IH and the mechanisms underlying symptomatic remission.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Prevalence and Course of Idiopathic Hypersomnia in the Wisconsin Sleep Cohort Study
- Date Crossref
- 23/01/2024
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.