Cargando…

Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: Up to 77% of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) have positional OSA (POSA) but traditional positional therapy (PT) methods have failed as they were poorly tolerated. New convenient vibratory PT devices have been invented but while recent studies suggest high treatment efficacy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mok, Yingjuan, Tan, Alvin, Hsu, Pon Poh, Seow, Audrey, Chan, Yiong Huak, Wong, Hang Siang, Poh, Yvonne, Wong, Keith K H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7231442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31896735
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2019-213547
_version_ 1783535190962864128
author Mok, Yingjuan
Tan, Alvin
Hsu, Pon Poh
Seow, Audrey
Chan, Yiong Huak
Wong, Hang Siang
Poh, Yvonne
Wong, Keith K H
author_facet Mok, Yingjuan
Tan, Alvin
Hsu, Pon Poh
Seow, Audrey
Chan, Yiong Huak
Wong, Hang Siang
Poh, Yvonne
Wong, Keith K H
author_sort Mok, Yingjuan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Up to 77% of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) have positional OSA (POSA) but traditional positional therapy (PT) methods have failed as they were poorly tolerated. New convenient vibratory PT devices have been invented but while recent studies suggest high treatment efficacy and adherence, there are no published data comparing these devices directly with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Our objective is to evaluate if a convenient vibratory PT device is non-inferior to CPAP in POSA treatment. METHODS: In this crossover randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients with POSA with significant daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)≥10). POSA diagnosis was based on: (1) total Apnoea/Hypopnoea Index (AHI)>10/hour and non-supine AHI<10/hour (2) supine AHI≥2 × non-supine AHI. Patients used their initial allocated devices (PT or CPAP) for 8 weeks before crossing to the alternative intervention after a 1 week washout. The primary aim is to measure changes in ESS between the two treatments. Secondary outcomes include sleep study parameters and patient treatment preference (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03125512). RESULTS: 40 patients completed the trial between April 2017 and December 2018. Difference in ESS after 8 weeks of device use (PT minus CPAP) was 2.0 (95% CI 0.68 to 3.32), exceeding our predetermined non-inferiority margin of 1.5. AHI on CPAP was lower than with PT (4.0±3.2 vs 13.0±13.8 events/hour, respectively, p=0.001), although both were lower than at baseline. Time spent supine was significantly lower with PT than CPAP (p<0.001). 60% of patients preferred CPAP, 20% preferred PT, while 20% preferred neither device. CONCLUSIONS: The non-inferiority ESS endpoint for PT compared with CPAP was not met and the results were inconclusive. Future trials with larger sample sizes or in less symptomatic patients are warranted to provide further insight into the role of these new vibratory PT devices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7231442
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72314422020-05-18 Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial Mok, Yingjuan Tan, Alvin Hsu, Pon Poh Seow, Audrey Chan, Yiong Huak Wong, Hang Siang Poh, Yvonne Wong, Keith K H Thorax Sleep OBJECTIVES: Up to 77% of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) have positional OSA (POSA) but traditional positional therapy (PT) methods have failed as they were poorly tolerated. New convenient vibratory PT devices have been invented but while recent studies suggest high treatment efficacy and adherence, there are no published data comparing these devices directly with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Our objective is to evaluate if a convenient vibratory PT device is non-inferior to CPAP in POSA treatment. METHODS: In this crossover randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients with POSA with significant daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)≥10). POSA diagnosis was based on: (1) total Apnoea/Hypopnoea Index (AHI)>10/hour and non-supine AHI<10/hour (2) supine AHI≥2 × non-supine AHI. Patients used their initial allocated devices (PT or CPAP) for 8 weeks before crossing to the alternative intervention after a 1 week washout. The primary aim is to measure changes in ESS between the two treatments. Secondary outcomes include sleep study parameters and patient treatment preference (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03125512). RESULTS: 40 patients completed the trial between April 2017 and December 2018. Difference in ESS after 8 weeks of device use (PT minus CPAP) was 2.0 (95% CI 0.68 to 3.32), exceeding our predetermined non-inferiority margin of 1.5. AHI on CPAP was lower than with PT (4.0±3.2 vs 13.0±13.8 events/hour, respectively, p=0.001), although both were lower than at baseline. Time spent supine was significantly lower with PT than CPAP (p<0.001). 60% of patients preferred CPAP, 20% preferred PT, while 20% preferred neither device. CONCLUSIONS: The non-inferiority ESS endpoint for PT compared with CPAP was not met and the results were inconclusive. Future trials with larger sample sizes or in less symptomatic patients are warranted to provide further insight into the role of these new vibratory PT devices. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-04 2020-01-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7231442/ /pubmed/31896735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2019-213547 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Sleep
Mok, Yingjuan
Tan, Alvin
Hsu, Pon Poh
Seow, Audrey
Chan, Yiong Huak
Wong, Hang Siang
Poh, Yvonne
Wong, Keith K H
Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial
title Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial
title_full Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial
title_short Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial
title_sort comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to cpap in positional osa: a crossover randomised controlled trial
topic Sleep
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7231442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31896735
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2019-213547
work_keys_str_mv AT mokyingjuan comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT tanalvin comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hsuponpoh comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT seowaudrey comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT chanyionghuak comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT wonghangsiang comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT pohyvonne comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT wongkeithkh comparingtreatmenteffectsofaconvenientvibratorypositionaldevicetocpapinpositionalosaacrossoverrandomisedcontrolledtrial