Is more NCPAP better?

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES To assess the benefit of NCPAP in OSA and its relation to the degree of use of NCPAP. DESIGN Randomised parallel controlled one month study comparing NCPAP set at therapeutic levels of pressure, with NCPAP set at sub-therapeutic pressure levels. SETTING Teaching hospital sleep clinic and laboratory SUBJECTS 101 men referred for investigation of possible OSA who were sleepy (Epworth Sleepiness Score > or = 10) and had > or = 10/hr of >4% dips in SaO2 due to OSA. OUTCOME MEASURES Baseline and one month measures of Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS), Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT), and the Energy/Vitality dimension of the SF-36 (health status questionnaire). Correlation of these outcome measures with NCPAP usage. RESULTS All outcome measures improved significantly more in the therapeutic, compared to the sub-therapeutic, group (e.g. ESS 15.0 to 13.0 on sub-therapeutic, and 15.5 to 7.0 on therapeutic, p<1x10(-6)). The degree of improvement correlated significantly with NCPAP usage in the therapeutic group (ESS, r=-0.60; MWT, r=0.55) but insignificantly in the sub-therapeutic group (ESS, r=-0.15; MWT, r=-0.06). Sub-therapeutic NCPAP did not improve OSA severity and acted as a control. CONCLUSIONS NCPAP is clearly effective in relieving the sleepiness of OSA compared to a control group identical in every way, except for receiving a nasal pressure inadequate to control the OSA.

0200400600800'02'04'06'08'10'12'14'16
Citations per Year

2,492 Citations

Semantic Scholar estimates that this publication has 2,492 citations based on the available data.

See our FAQ for additional information.

Cite this paper

@article{Stradling2000IsMN, title={Is more NCPAP better?}, author={John Stradling and Robert J. Davies}, journal={Sleep}, year={2000}, volume={23 Suppl 4}, pages={S150-3} }