These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: CPAP with algorithm-based versus titrated pressure: A randomized study.
    Author: Noseda A, André S, Potmans V, Kentos M, de Maertelaer V, Hoffmann G.
    Journal: Sleep Med; 2009 Oct; 10(9):988-92. PubMed ID: 19230758.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Our goal was to evaluate whether an algorithm-prescribed pressure is effective in sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (SAHS) patients requiring continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). METHODS: SAHS patients with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI)>20/h were selected for a parallel group randomized study including an in-sleep laboratory acute phase and a domiciliary chronic phase. After baseline polysomnography, patients had a second night polysomnography either with CPAP at the algorithm-calculated pressure, followed by home treatment at this pressure without any correction or adjustment (calculation group), or with auto-CPAP titration, followed by home treatment at the pressure judged to be optimal from the auto-titration (titration group). The primary outcome was the change in Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) at 6 months. RESULTS: The calculated pressure (mean (SD)) was 7.0 (1.4) in the calculation group (n=33), while the optimal pressure was 7.0 (2.2)cmH(2)O in the titration group (n=36). During the 6-month treatment at home, the ESS decreased from 8.3 (4.9) to 5.4 (4.0) in the calculation group (n=20) and from 8.7 (5.4) to 6.4 (5.4) in the titration group (n=20) (between-group difference not significant). CONCLUSION: In these SAHS patients with moderate sleepiness treated with CPAP, we found no difference in effectiveness between an algorithm-based pressure and an auto-titrated pressure.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]