rss
Thorax 2006;61:226-231 doi:10.1136/thx.2005.046300
  • Sleep disordered breathing

Comparison of three ways to determine and deliver pressure during nasal CPAP therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea

  1. S D West,
  2. D R Jones,
  3. J R Stradling
  1. Sleep Unit, Oxford Centre for Respiratory Medicine, Churchill Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LJ, UK
  1. Correspondence to:
    Dr S D West
    Oxford Centre for Respiratory Medicine, Churchill Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LJ, UK; sophie{at}west66.freeserve.co.uk
  • Received 8 May 2005
  • Accepted 4 October 2005
  • Published Online First 27 October 2005

Abstract

Background: The simplest method of initiating and maintaining therapeutic continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) has not been established.

Methods: Ninety eight subjects with OSA requiring CPAP treatment (more than 10 dips in oxygen desaturation of >4% per hour of sleep study and Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS) >9) were randomised prospectively to three different methods of CPAP delivery for 6 months: (1) autotitration pressure throughout; (2) autotitration pressure for 1 week followed by fixed pressure (95th centile) thereafter; and (3) fixed pressure determined by algorithm (based on neck size and dip rate). Patients and investigators were blind to group allocation. One week after initiation the patients were routinely reviewed by sleep nurses. Study assessments took place before starting CPAP treatment and 1 and 6 months after to assess ESS, maintenance of wakefulness test, 24 hour blood pressure, general health (SF-36), and sleep apnoea related quality of life. CPAP internal monitoring data were also collected.

Results: There were no significant differences in any of the outcome measures or CPAP monitoring data between the three groups. The 95th centile CPAP pressures delivered in the 6 month and 1 week autotitration groups were higher than in the algorithm group, but the median pressures were lowest in the 6 month autotitration group.

Conclusions: The method of determining CPAP pressure for treatment of moderate to severe OSA makes no significant difference to clinical outcome measures. The autotitration CPAP machine used has no advantage in this setting over simpler methods of pressure determination.

Footnotes

  • Published Online First 27 October 2005

  • ResMed UK provided part financial support for the purchase of CPAP machines for the study but was not involved in its design or analysis. D Jones was supported in part by a Helen Bearpark Scholarship from the Australasian Sleep Association and by the Sleep Apnoea Trust Association (UK).

  • None of the authors has any conflict of interest.

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.