Literature DB >> 14665501

Oral continuous positive airway pressure for sleep apnea: effectiveness, patient preference, and adherence.

Jaime Beecroft1, Sandra Zanon, Dejan Lukic, Patrick Hanly.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the most definitive medical therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Many patients have difficulty tolerating nasal CPAP due to nasal airway problems, mouth leak, and general discomfort from the mask and headgear. These limitations may be overcome by an oral mask (Oracle; Fisher & Paykel Healthcare; Languna Hills, CA) that does not require headgear. We performed a study to compare the Oracle mask to conventional nasal and oronasal masks in the effectiveness of CPAP delivery and patient satisfaction and adherence.
METHODS: Ninety-eight, consecutive CPAP-naïve patients with OSA diagnosed by overnight polysomnography (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] > 5) were referred for CPAP therapy. All patients were presented with a variety of CPAP masks, including nasal, oronasal, and Oracle, and reasons for mask choice were documented. After 3 weeks of acclimatization to the mask of their choice, patients had a CPAP titration sleep study to determine their optimal CPAP level. Further follow-up was obtained 2 months and 6 months later with a subjective patient assessment of CPAP use and efficacy, mask comfort, and upper airway dryness.
RESULTS: Patients were predominantly male (70%), middle aged (50.6 +/- 11.7 years), and moderately obese (body mass index, 32.5 +/- 9.0) with severe OSA (AHI, 40.6 +/- 25.8/h) [mean +/- SD]. Patients were classified into three groups based on their choice of mask: nasal (66%), Oracle (27%), and oronasal (7%). Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. Optimal CPAP was not significantly different between mask groups (nasal, 7.7 +/- 2.1 cm H(2)O; Oracle, 8.0 +/- 2.0 cm H(2)O; oronasal, 9.7 +/- 3.2 cm H(2)O; p = 0.267). Subjective ratings of adherence, efficacy, and mask comfort were also similar between groups. However, the Oracle group had more complaints of upper airway dryness and "rain-out." The oronasal group had a disproportionately greater number of dropouts from CPAP therapy than the Oracle group (57% vs 19%, p = 0.046). Nine patients changed from the Oracle mask to a nasal mask during the study, whereas no patients changed from their nasal or oronasal masks.
CONCLUSIONS: The Oracle mask is an efficacious interface for long-term CPAP therapy in patients with OSA. The main limitations of the mask are upper airway dryness and rain-out associated with heated humidification, which may be improved by further technical modifications. Oracle may be more acceptable than oronasal masks for patients who cannot rely exclusively on the nasal airway for CPAP therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14665501     DOI: 10.1378/chest.124.6.2200

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chest        ISSN: 0012-3692            Impact factor:   9.410


  12 in total

1.  Treatment of Adult Obstructive Sleep Apnea With Positive Airway Pressure: An American Academy of Sleep Medicine Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and GRADE Assessment.

Authors:  Susheel P Patil; Indu A Ayappa; Sean M Caples; R Joh Kimoff; Sanjay R Patel; Christopher G Harrod
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2019-02-15       Impact factor: 4.062

2.  Effect of addition of chin strap on PAP compliance, nightly duration of use, and other factors.

Authors:  Shelley R Knowles; Daniel T O'Brien; Shiling Zhang; Anupama Devara; James A Rowley
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 4.062

Review 3.  Tonsillectomy for Obstructive Sleep-Disordered Breathing: A Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sivakumar Chinnadurai; Atia K Jordan; Nila A Sathe; Christopher Fonnesbeck; Melissa L McPheeters; David O Francis
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Nasal versus oronasal mask in patients under auto-adjusting continuous positive airway pressure titration: a real-life study.

Authors:  Ricardo L M Duarte; Bruno A Mendes; Tiago S Oliveira-E-Sá; Flavio J Magalhães-da-Silveira; David Gozal
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2020-07-28       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Nasal versus oronasal continuous positive airway pressure masks for obstructive sleep apnea: a pilot investigation of pressure requirement, residual disease, and leak.

Authors:  Jessie P Bakker; Alister M Neill; Angela J Campbell
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 2.816

Review 6.  Choosing the right interface for positive airway pressure therapy in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.

Authors:  Ahmed S BaHammam; Tripat Singh; Smitha George; Karen Lorraine Acosta; Kashmira Barataman; Divinagracia E Gacuan
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 2.816

7.  Oronasal Masks Require a Higher Pressure than Nasal and Nasal Pillow Masks for the Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

Authors:  Sheetal Deshpande; Simon Joosten; Anthony Turton; Bradley A Edwards; Shane Landry; Darren R Mansfield; Garun S Hamilton
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 4.062

8.  Rates of initial acceptance of PAP masks and outcomes of mask switching.

Authors:  Adel Bachour; Pirjo Vitikainen; Paula Maasilta
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 2.816

Review 9.  Adherence to continuous positive airway pressure therapy: the challenge to effective treatment.

Authors:  Terri E Weaver; Ronald R Grunstein
Journal:  Proc Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2008-02-15

Review 10.  Continuous positive airway pressure delivery interfaces for obstructive sleep apnoea.

Authors:  C L Chai; A Pathinathan; B Smith
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-10-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.