Comparing Treatment Effectiveness and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Four Treatment Options for Obstructive Sleep Apnea

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2024.07.015
Robert J. Diecidue DMD, MD, PhD, MBA, MPH , Marianna D. LaNoue PhD, MS , Erika L. Manning PhD, MD, MPH , Colin T. Huntley MD , Joseph D. Harrington
{"title":"Comparing Treatment Effectiveness and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Four Treatment Options for Obstructive Sleep Apnea","authors":"Robert J. Diecidue DMD, MD, PhD, MBA, MPH ,&nbsp;Marianna D. LaNoue PhD, MS ,&nbsp;Erika L. Manning PhD, MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Colin T. Huntley MD ,&nbsp;Joseph D. Harrington","doi":"10.1016/j.joms.2024.07.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), mandibular advancement device (MAD), upper airway stimulation (UAS), and maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) are techniques to reduce apnea hypopnea index (AHI) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. Current literature does not include a direct comparison of the 4 methods.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The purpose of this study is to measure and compare the efficacy of 4 common OSA treatments: CPAP, MAD, UAS, MMA.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design, Setting, Sample</h3><div>This retrospective cohort study examines data from 119 patients treated at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia receiving CPAP, MAD, UAS, or MMA between January 2018 and December 2020. Patients were excluded for significant medical comorbidities, body mass index ≥45, cognitive limitations, central/mixed apnea history, or pregnancy.</div></div><div><h3>Predictor Variables</h3><div>The primary predictor variable was type of OSA intervention: CPAP, MAD, UAS, MMA. Treatments were assigned by treating physicians per their presenting OSA severity.</div></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Variables</h3><div>The primary outcome variable was efficacy defined as the therapeutic response to treatment measured using mean disease alleviation, a calculated variable (percentage) which employs post-treatment AHI adjusted by compliance (a measure of a patient's device use). Secondary therapeutic measures included remaining AHI and patient-reported outcome measures: Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index, Patient-reported Apnea Questionnaire.</div></div><div><h3>Covariates</h3><div>Demographic covariates included age, sex, height, weight, socioeconomic status, level of education, neck size, race, and body mass index. Clinical covariates included pretreatment AHI, AHI change, O2 nadir, adjusted compliance, and compliance.</div></div><div><h3>Analyses</h3><div>Multivariate statistics were computed with alpha level of 0.05, including a regression with the primary outcome variables, treatment variables, and potential covariates.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The sample included 119 subjects (mean age = 56.12, standard deviation [SD] = 5.81) with males at n = 72 (60%). MMA demonstrated greatest mean disease alleviation (M = 36.08, SD = 28.56), compared to UAS (M = 22.88, SD = 3.16), MAD (M = 6.80, SD = 8.13), and CPAP (M = 5.00, SD = 14.80), analysis of variance: <em>P</em> &lt; .001.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion and Relevance</h3><div>Both surgical treatments displayed significantly greater effectiveness than CPAP and MAD, suggesting that offering surgical alternatives sooner, particularly to those with severe OSA, may be logical in formulating more effective treatment guidelines.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16612,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","volume":"82 12","pages":"Pages 1537-1548"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278239124006827","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), mandibular advancement device (MAD), upper airway stimulation (UAS), and maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) are techniques to reduce apnea hypopnea index (AHI) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. Current literature does not include a direct comparison of the 4 methods.

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to measure and compare the efficacy of 4 common OSA treatments: CPAP, MAD, UAS, MMA.

Study Design, Setting, Sample

This retrospective cohort study examines data from 119 patients treated at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia receiving CPAP, MAD, UAS, or MMA between January 2018 and December 2020. Patients were excluded for significant medical comorbidities, body mass index ≥45, cognitive limitations, central/mixed apnea history, or pregnancy.

Predictor Variables

The primary predictor variable was type of OSA intervention: CPAP, MAD, UAS, MMA. Treatments were assigned by treating physicians per their presenting OSA severity.

Main Outcome Variables

The primary outcome variable was efficacy defined as the therapeutic response to treatment measured using mean disease alleviation, a calculated variable (percentage) which employs post-treatment AHI adjusted by compliance (a measure of a patient's device use). Secondary therapeutic measures included remaining AHI and patient-reported outcome measures: Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index, Patient-reported Apnea Questionnaire.

Covariates

Demographic covariates included age, sex, height, weight, socioeconomic status, level of education, neck size, race, and body mass index. Clinical covariates included pretreatment AHI, AHI change, O2 nadir, adjusted compliance, and compliance.

Analyses

Multivariate statistics were computed with alpha level of 0.05, including a regression with the primary outcome variables, treatment variables, and potential covariates.

Results

The sample included 119 subjects (mean age = 56.12, standard deviation [SD] = 5.81) with males at n = 72 (60%). MMA demonstrated greatest mean disease alleviation (M = 36.08, SD = 28.56), compared to UAS (M = 22.88, SD = 3.16), MAD (M = 6.80, SD = 8.13), and CPAP (M = 5.00, SD = 14.80), analysis of variance: P < .001.

Conclusion and Relevance

Both surgical treatments displayed significantly greater effectiveness than CPAP and MAD, suggesting that offering surgical alternatives sooner, particularly to those with severe OSA, may be logical in formulating more effective treatment guidelines.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较四种阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停治疗方案的治疗效果和患者报告的结果指标。
背景:持续气道正压(CPAP)、下颌前移器(MAD)、上气道刺激(UAS)和上颌下颌前移器(MMA)是降低阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)患者呼吸暂停低通气指数(AHI)的技术。目的:本研究旨在测量和比较 4 种常见 OSA 治疗方法的疗效:研究设计、环境和样本:这项回顾性队列研究审查了费城托马斯杰斐逊大学医院在 2018 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月期间接受 CPAP、MAD、UAS 或 MMA 治疗的 119 名患者的数据。排除了有重大医疗合并症、体重指数≥45、认知能力受限、中枢性/混合性呼吸暂停病史或怀孕的患者:主要预测变量为 OSA 干预类型:CPAP、MAD、UAS、MMA。治疗由主治医生根据患者的 OSA 严重程度进行分配:主要结果变量为疗效,即使用疾病缓解平均值衡量的治疗反应,这是一个计算变量(百分比),采用治疗后 AHI,并根据依从性(患者使用设备的衡量标准)进行调整。次要治疗指标包括剩余 AHI 和患者报告结果指标:埃普沃思嗜睡量表、睡眠呼吸暂停生活质量指数、患者报告的呼吸暂停问卷:人口统计学协变量包括年龄、性别、身高、体重、社会经济地位、教育程度、颈部大小、种族和体重指数。临床协变量包括治疗前 AHI、AHI 变化、O2 最低值、调整后依从性和依从性:多变量统计计算的α水平为0.05,包括与主要结果变量、治疗变量和潜在协变量的回归:样本包括 119 名受试者(平均年龄 = 56.12 岁,标准差 [SD] = 5.81),其中男性 72 名(占 60%)。与 UAS(M = 22.88,SD = 3.16)、MAD(M = 6.80,SD = 8.13)和 CPAP(M = 5.00,SD = 14.80)相比,MMA 的平均疾病缓解程度最大(M = 36.08,SD = 28.56),方差分析:P 结论和相关性:两种手术治疗方法的有效性均明显高于 CPAP 和 MAD,这表明尽早提供手术替代方案,尤其是对严重 OSA 患者,可能符合制定更有效治疗指南的逻辑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
0
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: This monthly journal offers comprehensive coverage of new techniques, important developments and innovative ideas in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Practice-applicable articles help develop the methods used to handle dentoalveolar surgery, facial injuries and deformities, TMJ disorders, oral cancer, jaw reconstruction, anesthesia and analgesia. The journal also includes specifics on new instruments and diagnostic equipment and modern therapeutic drugs and devices. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery is recommended for first or priority subscription by the Dental Section of the Medical Library Association.
期刊最新文献
Does Varying Platelet-Rich Fibrin Centri̇fugati̇on Protocols Enhance New Bone Formati̇on in Extracti̇on Site? Fluorescence Visualization-Guided Surgery Improves Local Control for Mandibular Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Do Postoperative Surgeon Phone Calls Improve Outcomes Following Mandibular Fracture Repair? Geographic Trends in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Residency Match. What is the Minimal Perceptible Change for the Dimensional Alteration of Facial Structures in the Frontal View?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1