Premium
Impact of continuous positive airway pressure mode on adherence to treatment in obstructive sleep apnea patients awaiting bariatric surgery
Author(s) -
Kermelly Sophie B.,
Lajoie Annie C.,
Boucher MarieEve,
Sériès Frédéric
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of sleep research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.297
H-Index - 117
eISSN - 1365-2869
pISSN - 0962-1105
DOI - 10.1111/jsr.13288
Subject(s) - obstructive sleep apnea , medicine , continuous positive airway pressure , airway , confidence interval , anesthesia , positive airway pressure , sleep apnea , population , uvulopalatopharyngoplasty , positive pressure , randomized controlled trial , apnea , surgery , polysomnography , environmental health
Summary Obstructive sleep apnea is prevalent in the bariatric population, and is associated with various complications. Despite increasing popularity, automatic positive airway pressure has not yet been studied in this population. The objective was to compare treatment adherence between automatic positive airway pressure and fixed positive airway pressure (continuous positive airway pressure) in obstructive sleep apnea patients awaiting bariatric surgery. This randomized controlled trial involved obese patients newly diagnosed with severe obstructive sleep apnea and awaiting bariatric surgery. The primary outcome was the difference in adherence between automatic positive airway pressure and continuous positive airway pressure pre‐operatively. Secondary outcomes included positive airway pressure efficacy, adherence at 1 month, adverse effects, quality of life and peri‐operative complications. Analyses were conducted using a modified intention‐to‐treat methodology. Fifty patients were randomized. Baseline characteristics and duration of positive airway pressure therapy were comparable between groups. At the time of surgery, the percentage of overall nights positive airway pressure used was 96.9% [95% confidence interval: 93.5–100] and 86.0% [95% confidence interval: 66.9–100] in the automatic positive airway pressure and continuous positive airway pressure groups, respectively ( p = .047). Average use was 6.3 hr per night [95% confidence interval: 5.1–7.2] and 5.9 hr per night [95% confidence interval: 3.0–8.8], with a difference of 0.4 hr favouring automatic positive airway pressure ( p = .75). Nightly use ≥ 4 hr per night was 86.4% and 74.0% in the automatic positive airway pressure and fixed continuous positive airway pressure groups, respectively ( p = .22). There were no statistically significant differences regarding adherence at 1 month, efficacy parameters, adverse effects, quality of life and peri‐operative complications. With no difference on the safety profile and efficiency parameters, treatment adherence is not improved with automatic positive airway pressure compared with fixed continuous positive airway pressure in obstructive sleep apnea patients awaiting bariatric surgery.