Emerson M Wickwire1, Jennifer S Albrecht2, Maxwell M Towe3, Samuel A Abariga2, Montserrat Diaz-Abad4, Andrea G Shipper5, Liesl M Cooper6, Samson Z Assefa7, Sarah E Tom8, Steven M Scharf4. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD; Sleep Disorders Center, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: ewickwire@som.umaryland.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 4. Sleep Disorders Center, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD. 5. Health Sciences and Human Services Library, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD. 6. ResMed Corp, San Diego, CA. 7. Sleep Disorders Center, Fort Belvoir Community Hospital, Fort Belvoir, VA. 8. Department of Neurology, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the published literature regarding the impact of treatment for OSA on monetized health economic outcomes. METHODS: Customized structured searches were performed in PubMed, Embase (Embase.com), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley) databases. Reference lists of eligible studies were also analyzed. Titles and abstracts were examined, and articles were identified for full-text review. Studies that met inclusion criteria were evaluated in detail, and study characteristics were extracted using a standardized template. Quantitative characteristics of the studies were summarized, and a qualitative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Literature searches identified 2,017 nonredundant abstracts, and 196 full-text articles were selected for review. Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria and were included in the final synthesis. Seven studies included formal cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses. Ten studies employed cohort designs, and four studies employed randomized controlled trial or quasi-experimental designs. Positive airway pressure was the most common treatment modality, but oral appliances and surgical approaches were also included. The most common health economic outcomes were health-care use (HCU) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Follow-ups ranged from 6 weeks to 5 years. Overall, 15 of 18 comparisons found that treatment of OSA resulted in a positive economic impact. Treatment adherence and OSA severity were positively associated with cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Although study methodologies varied widely, evidence consistently suggested that treatment of OSA was associated with favorable economic outcomes, including QALYs, within accepted ranges of cost-effectiveness, reduced HCU, and reduced monetized costs.
OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the published literature regarding the impact of treatment for OSA on monetized health economic outcomes. METHODS: Customized structured searches were performed in PubMed, Embase (Embase.com), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley) databases. Reference lists of eligible studies were also analyzed. Titles and abstracts were examined, and articles were identified for full-text review. Studies that met inclusion criteria were evaluated in detail, and study characteristics were extracted using a standardized template. Quantitative characteristics of the studies were summarized, and a qualitative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Literature searches identified 2,017 nonredundant abstracts, and 196 full-text articles were selected for review. Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria and were included in the final synthesis. Seven studies included formal cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses. Ten studies employed cohort designs, and four studies employed randomized controlled trial or quasi-experimental designs. Positive airway pressure was the most common treatment modality, but oral appliances and surgical approaches were also included. The most common health economic outcomes were health-care use (HCU) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Follow-ups ranged from 6 weeks to 5 years. Overall, 15 of 18 comparisons found that treatment of OSA resulted in a positive economic impact. Treatment adherence and OSA severity were positively associated with cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Although study methodologies varied widely, evidence consistently suggested that treatment of OSA was associated with favorable economic outcomes, including QALYs, within accepted ranges of cost-effectiveness, reduced HCU, and reduced monetized costs.
Authors: Patricia Peñacoba; M Antònia Llauger; Ana M Fortuna; Xavier Flor; Gabriel Sampol; Anna Maria Pedro Pijoan; Núria Grau; Carme Santiveri; Joan Juvanteny; José Ignacio Aoiz; Joan Bayó; Patricia Lloberes; Mercè Mayos Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 4.062
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
Authors: Emerson M Wickwire; Sarah E Tom; Aparna Vadlamani; Montserrat Diaz-Abad; Liesl M Cooper; Abree M Johnson; Steven M Scharf; Jennifer S Albrecht Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2019-12-05 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Fabienne L Huber; Michael Furian; Malcolm Kohler; Tsogyal D Latshang; Yvonne Nussbaumer-Ochsner; Alexander Turk; Otto D Schoch; Irene Laube; Robert Thurnheer; Konrad E Bloch Journal: Respiration Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 3.580
Authors: Charlie Strange; Chelsea L Richard; Shuxiang Shan; Barbara A Phillips; Sarojini Kanotra; M Bradley Drummond; Lindsay Megenhardt; Chitra Lal; Roy A Pleasants Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Emerson M Wickwire; M Doyinsola Bailey; Virend K Somers; Liesl M Oldstone; Mukta C Srivastava; Abree M Johnson; Steven M Scharf; Jennifer S Albrecht Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 4.062