RATIONALE: In Belgium, patients with moderate to severe OSA (AHI > 20) who show less than 30 micro-arousals per hour slept (MAI) cannot benefit from CPAP refund by the social security (SS). OBJECTIVES: To assess the influence of reimbursement on CPAP acceptance, and long-term adherence. METHODS: OSA patients (AHI > 20) were included regardless of MAI. All patients were offered a CPAP trial of 3-5 days for habituation. Two groups were defined and compared: «Out of pocket money» patients (OOP) with MAI < 30 that were invited to purchase their device and «reimbursed group» that were offered a CPAP reimbursed by the social security. RESULTS: 812 patients were found: 59 in the OOP group, mostly females, sleepier and using more hypnotics. Out of the reimbursed group, 183 patients were matched to the OOP patients on the grounds of age, AHI and BMI. 90% of OOP and 94% of reimbursed patients (p 0.379) accepted a CPAP trial; 74% of OOP and 90% of reimbursed patients acquired a CPAP device (p 0.005) thereafter, whereas 82% and, respectively, 84% of those (p 0.254) were still on CPAP after a mean follow-up of 711 and 604 days with a mean ± SD daily compliance of 5.3 ± 3 and 6.1 ± 2 h, respectively (p 0.159). Only fatigue scale seems to influence the purchase of CPAP by OOP patients. CONCLUSION: CPAP reimbursement influences the purchase of CPAP but once the device becomes available there is no difference with reimbursed patients in long-term adherence.
RATIONALE: In Belgium, patients with moderate to severe OSA (AHI > 20) who show less than 30 micro-arousals per hour slept (MAI) cannot benefit from CPAP refund by the social security (SS). OBJECTIVES: To assess the influence of reimbursement on CPAP acceptance, and long-term adherence. METHODS: OSA patients (AHI > 20) were included regardless of MAI. All patients were offered a CPAP trial of 3-5 days for habituation. Two groups were defined and compared: «Out of pocket money» patients (OOP) with MAI < 30 that were invited to purchase their device and «reimbursed group» that were offered a CPAP reimbursed by the social security. RESULTS: 812 patients were found: 59 in the OOP group, mostly females, sleepier and using more hypnotics. Out of the reimbursed group, 183 patients were matched to the OOPpatients on the grounds of age, AHI and BMI. 90% of OOP and 94% of reimbursed patients (p 0.379) accepted a CPAP trial; 74% of OOP and 90% of reimbursed patients acquired a CPAP device (p 0.005) thereafter, whereas 82% and, respectively, 84% of those (p 0.254) were still on CPAP after a mean follow-up of 711 and 604 days with a mean ± SD daily compliance of 5.3 ± 3 and 6.1 ± 2 h, respectively (p 0.159). Only fatigue scale seems to influence the purchase of CPAP by OOPpatients. CONCLUSION:CPAP reimbursement influences the purchase of CPAP but once the device becomes available there is no difference with reimbursed patients in long-term adherence.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adherence; CPAP; acceptance; obstructive sleep apnea; social security support