Robert Stansbury1, Mohamad Abdelfattah1, Jonathan Chan1, Abhinav Mittal1, Fahad Alqahtani2, Sunil Sharma1. 1. Medicine/Section Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Medical Center Drive Health Sciences Center, West Virginia University School of Medicine , Morgantown, West Virginia, United States. 2. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Kentucky College of Medicine , Lexington, Kentucky, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rural communities represent a vulnerable population that would significantly benefit from hospital-based OSA screening given these areas tend to have significant health-care disparities and poor health outcomes. Although inpatient screening has been studied at urban hospitals, no study to date has assessed this approach in rural populations. METHODS: This study utilized the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) to generate a list of potential candidates by employing inclusion/exclusion criteria as screening. Subjects identified were then approached and offered information regarding the study. Screening for OSA entailed a tiered approach utilizing the sleep apnea clinical score (SAC) and portable sleep testing. Individuals identified as high risk (SAC ≥ 15) for OSA underwent evaluation with a portable sleep testing system while hospitalized. All participants with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥5 events/h confirmed by a sleep medicine physician were considered screen positive for OSA. If approved/available, subjects screening positive for OSA were provided with an auto-titrating continuous positive airway pressure (PAP). Patient characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Categorical data were described using contingency tables, including counts and percentages. Continuously scaled measures were summarized by median with range. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT03056443. RESULTS: Nine hundred and fifty-eight potential subjects were identified. The three most common reasons for exclusion included previous OSA diagnosis or exposure to PAP therapy (n = 357), advanced illness (n = 380), and declined participation by the individual (n = 68). The remaining 31 subjects underwent further evaluation for obstructive sleep apnea. Twenty-three subjects had a high sleep apnea clinic score. Per our study protocol, 13 subjects who screened positive for OSA were initiated on APAP therapy. Conclusion: Our study provides important insight into the burden of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) and unique challenges of hospital-based OSA screening/treatment in a rural setting. Our study identified barriers to successful screening in a rural population that may be well addressed by adapting previous research in hospital sleep medicine.
BACKGROUND: Rural communities represent a vulnerable population that would significantly benefit from hospital-based OSA screening given these areas tend to have significant health-care disparities and poor health outcomes. Although inpatient screening has been studied at urban hospitals, no study to date has assessed this approach in rural populations. METHODS: This study utilized the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) to generate a list of potential candidates by employing inclusion/exclusion criteria as screening. Subjects identified were then approached and offered information regarding the study. Screening for OSA entailed a tiered approach utilizing the sleep apnea clinical score (SAC) and portable sleep testing. Individuals identified as high risk (SAC ≥ 15) for OSA underwent evaluation with a portable sleep testing system while hospitalized. All participants with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥5 events/h confirmed by a sleep medicine physician were considered screen positive for OSA. If approved/available, subjects screening positive for OSA were provided with an auto-titrating continuous positive airway pressure (PAP). Patient characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Categorical data were described using contingency tables, including counts and percentages. Continuously scaled measures were summarized by median with range. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT03056443. RESULTS: Nine hundred and fifty-eight potential subjects were identified. The three most common reasons for exclusion included previous OSA diagnosis or exposure to PAP therapy (n = 357), advanced illness (n = 380), and declined participation by the individual (n = 68). The remaining 31 subjects underwent further evaluation for obstructive sleep apnea. Twenty-three subjects had a high sleep apnea clinic score. Per our study protocol, 13 subjects who screened positive for OSA were initiated on APAP therapy. Conclusion: Our study provides important insight into the burden of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) and unique challenges of hospital-based OSA screening/treatment in a rural setting. Our study identified barriers to successful screening in a rural population that may be well addressed by adapting previous research in hospital sleep medicine.
Entities:
Keywords:
Obstructive sleep apnea; hospital screening for obstructive sleep apnea; hospital treatment obstructive sleep apnea; rural health
Authors: Amy M Sawyer; Nalaka S Gooneratne; Carole L Marcus; Dafna Ofer; Kathy C Richards; Terri E Weaver Journal: Sleep Med Rev Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 11.609
Authors: Michael L Stanchina; Lauren M Welicky; Walter Donat; David Lee; William Corrao; Atul Malhotra Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Mark H Sanders; Anne B Newman; Catherine L Haggerty; Susan Redline; Michael Lebowitz; Jonathan Samet; George T O'Connor; Naresh M Punjabi; Eyal Shahar Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2003-01-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Naresh M Punjabi; Brian S Caffo; James L Goodwin; Daniel J Gottlieb; Anne B Newman; George T O'Connor; David M Rapoport; Susan Redline; Helaine E Resnick; John A Robbins; Eyal Shahar; Mark L Unruh; Jonathan M Samet Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2009-08-18 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Robert Stansbury; Patrick Strollo; Nathan Pauly; Ira Sharma; Marco Schaaf; Anina Aaron; Judith Feinberg Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 4.062