BACKGROUND: Standard practice in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) management requires that a positive diagnostic, overnight polysomnography (PSG) test be obtained before initiating treatment. However, long waiting times due to lack of access to PSG testing facilities may delay the initiation of definitive treatment for OSA. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the response of patients who had a high clinical suspicion for OSA and who were waiting for a PSG test to an empirical continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) trial. METHODS: A retrospective study of all patients who had been offered empirical CPAP therapy for suspected OSA was conducted. After outpatient assessment, 183 patients with a high pretest probability of having OSA began empirical CPAP testing using an arbitrary CPAP pressure. The presence of OSA, the accuracy of empirical CPAP pressure prescription, the adherence to empirical CPAP and the improvement in daytime somnolence were evaluated at the time of PSG. RESULTS: Of 183 patients on a CPAP trial, 91% had OSA, which was at least moderate (more than 15 apneas and hypopneas per hour of sleep) in 75% of the patients. Eighty per cent of the patients had significant daytime somnolence (Epworth Sleepiness Scale [ESS] greater than 10, mean +/- SD ESS 14+/-5), which improved with CPAP (ESS 9.0+/-5, P<0.01). In 40% of the patients, the arbitrary CPAP pressure was lower than that determined by manual titration. Adherence to a trial of CPAP (longer than 2 h/night) predicted OSA with a sensitivity of 82% and a specificity of 41%; the positive and negative predictive values were 92% and 22%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At the time of PSG testing, OSA was present in 91% of the patients who had received empirical CPAP. An empirical CPAP provided satisfactory interim treatment for excessive somnolence, despite the fact that the CPAP pressure was suboptimal in 40% of the patients.
BACKGROUND: Standard practice in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) management requires that a positive diagnostic, overnight polysomnography (PSG) test be obtained before initiating treatment. However, long waiting times due to lack of access to PSG testing facilities may delay the initiation of definitive treatment for OSA. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the response of patients who had a high clinical suspicion for OSA and who were waiting for a PSG test to an empirical continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) trial. METHODS: A retrospective study of all patients who had been offered empirical CPAP therapy for suspected OSA was conducted. After outpatient assessment, 183 patients with a high pretest probability of having OSA began empirical CPAP testing using an arbitrary CPAP pressure. The presence of OSA, the accuracy of empirical CPAP pressure prescription, the adherence to empirical CPAP and the improvement in daytime somnolence were evaluated at the time of PSG. RESULTS: Of 183 patients on a CPAP trial, 91% had OSA, which was at least moderate (more than 15 apneas and hypopneas per hour of sleep) in 75% of the patients. Eighty per cent of the patients had significant daytime somnolence (Epworth Sleepiness Scale [ESS] greater than 10, mean +/- SD ESS 14+/-5), which improved with CPAP (ESS 9.0+/-5, P<0.01). In 40% of the patients, the arbitrary CPAP pressure was lower than that determined by manual titration. Adherence to a trial of CPAP (longer than 2 h/night) predicted OSA with a sensitivity of 82% and a specificity of 41%; the positive and negative predictive values were 92% and 22%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At the time of PSG testing, OSA was present in 91% of the patients who had received empirical CPAP. An empirical CPAP provided satisfactory interim treatment for excessive somnolence, despite the fact that the CPAP pressure was suboptimal in 40% of the patients.
Authors: D J Gottlieb; C W Whitney; W H Bonekat; C Iber; G D James; M Lebowitz; F J Nieto; C E Rosenberg Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: E Ballester; J R Badia; L Hernández; E Carrasco; J de Pablo; C Fornas; R Rodriguez-Roisin; J M Montserrat Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 21.405