Flexible positive airway pressure improves treatment adherence compared with auto-adjusting PAP

与自动调节式PAP相比,柔性正压通气可提高治疗依从性。

阅读:1

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES: There are no clinical data comparing adherence and quality of life between auto-adjusting positive airway pressure (APAP) and two different flex positive airway pressure (PAP) devices (A-Flex, C-Flex) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). DESIGN AND SETTING: Ninety-three patients in whom OSA was newly diagnosed were randomly assigned to receive 3 mo of APAP (n = 31), APAP with C-Flex (n = 31), or APAP with A-Flex (n = 31). Objective adherence was determined after 3 mo of CPAP treatment, and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI) were examined at baseline and after 3 mo. After 3 mo, patients in the APAP with A-Flex group and those in the APAP with C-Flex group were crossed over and those in the APAP group were switched to A-Flex for an additional 3 mo. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The groups were similar demographically. Treatment adherence during the first 3 mo was significantly greater in the APAP with C-Flex group (APAP with C-Flex: 5.19 ± 1.84 h/night versus APAP: 3.96 ± 1.66 h/night versus APAP with A-Flex: 4.27 ± 2.12 h/night, P = 0.04). There was a significant improvement in two of four of the SAQLI domain scores and in the ESS and PSQI in the APAP with C-Flex group. Adherence significantly improved among the poor compliers (< 4 h/night of use) in the APAP group after change to APAP with A-Flex (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Of these three modes of PAP delivery, adherence was greatest with APAP with C-Flex. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00873977.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。