ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published online before print March 29, 2006
Eur Respir J 2006, doi:10.1183/09031936.06.00127205
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/1/159    most recent
09031936.06.00127205v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Permissions
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nolan, G.M.
Right arrow Articles by McNicholas, W.T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nolan, G.M.
Right arrow Articles by McNicholas, W.T.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Comparison of three auto-adjusting positive pressure devices in patients with sleep apnoea

G.M. Nolan 1, S. Ryan 1, T.M. O' Connor 1, W.T. McNicholas 1*

1 Respiratory Sleep Disorders Unit, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: walter.mcnicholas{at}ucd.ie.


  Abstract

Auto-adjustable continuous positive airway pressure (APAP) devices are an emerging treatment alternative to fixed pressure CPAP therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS). They have been engineered to automatically adjust pressure to the optimal level on a continuous basis. However, not all APAP technologies use the same algorithm. We compared three different APAP devices (Autoset Spirit, Breas PV 10i, and RemStar Auto) in a randomised crossover trial in patients already established on fixed pressure CPAP therapy. Outcome measures were compliance, quality of life and side effects.

27 middle aged patients (25 male) diagnosed previously with severe OSAS (apnoea/hypopnoea index (AHI) 48 [29;76] median [interquartile range]), established on CPAP therapy for more than 3 years, were randomised for 4 weeks to each APAP device.

Average pressure and patient compliance were significantly lower on the Breas PV10i device compared to the other APAP devices. The devices were similar in terms of quality of life, daytime sleepiness and upper airway side effects, but patients evaluated them significantly different in terms of device features, sleep quality and pressure comfort with the Breas PV10i being the least popular.

APAP devices differ in pressure delivery and patient compliance in OSAS patients.

Keywords:  APAP therapy, compliance, CPAP therapy, obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome, quality of life




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Proc Am Thorac SocHome page
M. H. Sanders, J. M. Montserrat, R. Farre, and R. J. Givelber
Positive Pressure Therapy: A Perspective on Evidence-based Outcomes and Methods of Application
Proceedings of the ATS, February 15, 2008; 5(2): 161 - 172.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ERRHome page
D. Pevernagie, J. F. Masa, J. C. Meurice, R. Farre, O. Marrone, and D. Rodenstein
Treatment of obstructive sleep-disordered breathing with positive airway pressure systems
Eur. Respir. Rev., December 1, 2007; 16(106): 125 - 131.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2006 by the European Respiratory Society.