Valentina Isetta1, Miguel A Negrín2, Carmen Monasterio3, Juan F Masa4, Nuria Feu5, Ainhoa Álvarez6, Francisco Campos-Rodriguez7, Concepción Ruiz8, Jorge Abad9, Francisco J Vázquez-Polo2, Ramon Farré1, Marina Galdeano10, Patricia Lloberes11, Cristina Embid12, Mónica de la Peña13, Javier Puertas14, Mireia Dalmases12, Neus Salord3, Jaime Corral4, Bernabé Jurado5, Carmen León8, Carlos Egea6, Aida Muñoz15, Olga Parra16, Roser Cambrodi17, María Martel-Escobar2, Meritxell Arqué18, Josep M Montserrat12. 1. Unitat de Biofísica i Bioenginyeria, Facultat de Medicina, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain. 2. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y TiDES Institute, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Islas Canarias, Spain. 3. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain Unidad del Sueño, Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario de Bellvitge, IDIBELL, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain Servicio de Neumología, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres, Spain. 5. Unidad del Sueño, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Universidad de Córdoba, IMIBIC, Córdoba, Spain. 6. Unidad Funcional de Sueño, Hospital Universitario Araba, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain. 7. Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario de Valme, Sevilla, Spain. 8. Servicio de Neumología, Unidad del Sueño, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 9. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Spain. 10. Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario Sagrat Cor, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 11. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain Servicio de Neumología, Unidad del Sueño, Hospital Universitario Vall d´Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 12. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain Servicio de Neumología, Unidad del Sueño, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 13. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, IdisPa, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. 14. Departamento de Neurofisiología Clínica y Unidad del Sueño, Hospital Universitario La Ribera, Alzira, Valencia, Spain Departamento de Fisiología, Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 15. Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Spain. 16. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario Sagrat Cor, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 17. Servicio de Neumología, Unidad del Sueño, Hospital Universitario Vall d´Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 18. Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, IdisPa, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Compliance with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy is essential in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), but adequate control is not always possible. This is clinically important because CPAP can reverse the morbidity and mortality associated with OSA. Telemedicine, with support provided via a web platform and video conferences, could represent a cost-effective alternative to standard care management. AIM: To assess the telemedicine impact on treatment compliance, cost-effectiveness and improvement in quality of life (QoL) when compared with traditional face-to-face follow-up. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was performed to compare a telemedicine-based CPAP follow-up strategy with standard face-to-face management. Consecutive OSA patients requiring CPAP treatment, with sufficient internet skills and who agreed to participate, were enrolled. They were followed-up at 1, 3 and 6 months and answered surveys about sleep, CPAP side effects and lifestyle. We compared CPAP compliance, cost-effectiveness and QoL between the beginning and the end of the study. A Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis with non-informative priors was performed. RESULTS: We randomised 139 patients. At 6 months, we found similar levels of CPAP compliance, and improved daytime sleepiness, QoL, side effects and degree of satisfaction in both groups. Despite requiring more visits, the telemedicine group was more cost-effective: costs were lower and differences in effectiveness were not relevant. CONCLUSIONS: A telemedicine-based strategy for the follow-up of CPAP treatment in patients with OSA was as effective as standard hospital-based care in terms of CPAP compliance and symptom improvement, with comparable side effects and satisfaction rates. The telemedicine-based strategy had lower total costs due to savings on transport and less lost productivity (indirect costs). TRIAL REGISTER NUMBER: NCT01716676. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Compliance with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy is essential in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), but adequate control is not always possible. This is clinically important because CPAP can reverse the morbidity and mortality associated with OSA. Telemedicine, with support provided via a web platform and video conferences, could represent a cost-effective alternative to standard care management. AIM: To assess the telemedicine impact on treatment compliance, cost-effectiveness and improvement in quality of life (QoL) when compared with traditional face-to-face follow-up. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was performed to compare a telemedicine-based CPAP follow-up strategy with standard face-to-face management. Consecutive OSA patients requiring CPAP treatment, with sufficient internet skills and who agreed to participate, were enrolled. They were followed-up at 1, 3 and 6 months and answered surveys about sleep, CPAP side effects and lifestyle. We compared CPAP compliance, cost-effectiveness and QoL between the beginning and the end of the study. A Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis with non-informative priors was performed. RESULTS: We randomised 139 patients. At 6 months, we found similar levels of CPAP compliance, and improved daytime sleepiness, QoL, side effects and degree of satisfaction in both groups. Despite requiring more visits, the telemedicine group was more cost-effective: costs were lower and differences in effectiveness were not relevant. CONCLUSIONS: A telemedicine-based strategy for the follow-up of CPAP treatment in patients with OSA was as effective as standard hospital-based care in terms of CPAP compliance and symptom improvement, with comparable side effects and satisfaction rates. The telemedicine-based strategy had lower total costs due to savings on transport and less lost productivity (indirect costs). TRIAL REGISTER NUMBER: NCT01716676. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Devin L Brown; Valerie Durkalski; Jeffrey S Durmer; Joseph P Broderick; Darin B Zahuranec; Deborah A Levine; Craig S Anderson; Dawn M Bravata; H Klar Yaggi; Lewis B Morgenstern; Claudia S Moy; Ronald D Chervin Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Daniela V Pachito; Ângela M Bagattini; Luciano F Drager; Alan L Eckeli; Aline Rocha Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 2.816