Prospective crossover trial of positional and CPAP therapy for the treatment of mild-to-moderate positional obstructive sleep apnea.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Malcolm R Wilson, Robert Carroll, Stephen Kinder, Alexander Ryan, Craig A Hukins, Brett Duce, Claire M Ellender
{"title":"Prospective crossover trial of positional and CPAP therapy for the treatment of mild-to-moderate positional obstructive sleep apnea.","authors":"Malcolm R Wilson, Robert Carroll, Stephen Kinder, Alexander Ryan, Craig A Hukins, Brett Duce, Claire M Ellender","doi":"10.5664/jcsm.11378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study objectives: </strong>To evaluate efficacy of vibrotactile positional therapy (PT) compared to standard CPAP therapy in mild-to-moderate positional obstructive sleep apnea (pOSA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective crossover randomized controlled trial of adult patients with treatment-naïve, symptomatic, mild-to-moderate pOSA - defined as ≥5 total apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) <30 with supine-to-non-supine (s:ns)AHI ratio ≥2. Participants were randomized to in-laboratory treatment initiation polysomnography with either PT or CPAP on sequential nights before an eight-week trial of each therapy. The primary endpoint was symptomatic improvement (Epworth Sleepiness Scale; ΔESS). Secondary endpoints included patient preference, usage, sleep architecture and quality of life (QoL) measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>52 participants were enrolled and completed both arms of the study. Participants were symptomatic with median ESS 12 (IQR 10-14). Treatment resulted in a significant (<i>p</i><0.001) symptomatic improvement with both PT and CPAP (ΔESS 4; IQR 6-11) without a significant difference between treatment arms (<i>p</i>=0.782). PT was effective at restricting supine sleep and demonstrated improved sleep efficiency compared with CPAP, although no better than baseline. Both therapies were effective at reducing AHI, although CPAP demonstrated superior AHI reduction. There were otherwise no clinically significant differences in sleep architecture, usage, or secondary outcomes including overall patient preference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this cohort, treatment with PT or CPAP resulted in clinically significant symptomatic improvement (ΔESS) that was not significantly different between treatment arms. No real difference was seen in other secondary outcome measures. This study provides further evidence to support the use of PT as an alternative first-line therapy with CPAP in appropriately selected patients with pOSA.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>Registry: Australian New Zealand Clinic Trials Registry; Name: Prospective crossover trial of Positional and Continuous positive airway pressure Therapy for the treatment of mild-to-moderate positional obstructive sleep apnoea; Identifier: ACTRN12619000475145; URL: https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377221&isReview=true.</p>","PeriodicalId":50233,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.11378","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study objectives: To evaluate efficacy of vibrotactile positional therapy (PT) compared to standard CPAP therapy in mild-to-moderate positional obstructive sleep apnea (pOSA).

Methods: Prospective crossover randomized controlled trial of adult patients with treatment-naïve, symptomatic, mild-to-moderate pOSA - defined as ≥5 total apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) <30 with supine-to-non-supine (s:ns)AHI ratio ≥2. Participants were randomized to in-laboratory treatment initiation polysomnography with either PT or CPAP on sequential nights before an eight-week trial of each therapy. The primary endpoint was symptomatic improvement (Epworth Sleepiness Scale; ΔESS). Secondary endpoints included patient preference, usage, sleep architecture and quality of life (QoL) measures.

Results: 52 participants were enrolled and completed both arms of the study. Participants were symptomatic with median ESS 12 (IQR 10-14). Treatment resulted in a significant (p<0.001) symptomatic improvement with both PT and CPAP (ΔESS 4; IQR 6-11) without a significant difference between treatment arms (p=0.782). PT was effective at restricting supine sleep and demonstrated improved sleep efficiency compared with CPAP, although no better than baseline. Both therapies were effective at reducing AHI, although CPAP demonstrated superior AHI reduction. There were otherwise no clinically significant differences in sleep architecture, usage, or secondary outcomes including overall patient preference.

Conclusions: In this cohort, treatment with PT or CPAP resulted in clinically significant symptomatic improvement (ΔESS) that was not significantly different between treatment arms. No real difference was seen in other secondary outcome measures. This study provides further evidence to support the use of PT as an alternative first-line therapy with CPAP in appropriately selected patients with pOSA.

Clinical trial registration: Registry: Australian New Zealand Clinic Trials Registry; Name: Prospective crossover trial of Positional and Continuous positive airway pressure Therapy for the treatment of mild-to-moderate positional obstructive sleep apnoea; Identifier: ACTRN12619000475145; URL: https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377221&isReview=true.

治疗轻度至中度体位性阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停的体位疗法和CPAP疗法的前瞻性交叉试验。
研究目的评估振动触觉体位疗法(PT)与标准 CPAP疗法相比对轻中度体位性阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(pOSA)的疗效:方法:前瞻性交叉随机对照试验,对象为未经治疗、无症状、轻度至中度位置性阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(定义为总呼吸暂停-低通气指数(AHI)≥5)的成年患者:52 名参与者参加并完成了两组研究。参与者均无症状,ESS 中位数为 12(IQR 10-14)。治疗效果显著(pp=0.782)。与 CPAP 相比,PT 能有效限制仰卧睡眠,并能提高睡眠效率,但不优于基线。两种疗法都能有效降低 AHI,但 CPAP 在降低 AHI 方面更胜一筹。除此之外,两种疗法在睡眠结构、使用情况或次要结果(包括患者的总体偏好)方面没有明显的临床差异:结论:在这组患者中,PT 或 CPAP 治疗可显著改善症状(ΔESS),但治疗组之间无明显差异。在其他次要结果测量中也未发现真正的差异。这项研究提供了进一步的证据,支持在适当选择的 pOSA 患者中使用 PT 作为 CPAP 的替代一线疗法:临床试验注册临床试验注册:注册表:澳大利亚-新西兰临床试验注册表;名称:前瞻性交叉试验:临床试验注册:注册表:澳大利亚-新西兰临床试验注册表;名称:治疗轻度至中度体位性阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停的体位性气道正压疗法和持续性气道正压疗法的前瞻性交叉试验;标识符:actrn126190004:ACTRN12619000475145;网址:https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377221&isReview=true。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
7.00%
发文量
321
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine focuses on clinical sleep medicine. Its emphasis is publication of papers with direct applicability and/or relevance to the clinical practice of sleep medicine. This includes clinical trials, clinical reviews, clinical commentary and debate, medical economic/practice perspectives, case series and novel/interesting case reports. In addition, the journal will publish proceedings from conferences, workshops and symposia sponsored by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine or other organizations related to improving the practice of sleep medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信