Nasal pillows as an alternative interface in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome initiating continuous positive airway pressure therapy.

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/207624
Title:
Nasal pillows as an alternative interface in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome initiating continuous positive airway pressure therapy.
Authors:
Ryan, Silke; Garvey, John F; Swan, Valerie; Behan, Renata; McNicholas, Walter T
Affiliation:
Sleep Research Laboratory, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Citation:
J Sleep Res. 2011 Jun;20(2):367-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2869.2010.00873.x.
Journal:
Journal of sleep research
Issue Date:
1-Feb-2012
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/207624
DOI:
10.1111/j.1365-2869.2010.00873.x
PubMed ID:
20673292
Abstract:
Side-effects directly due to the nasal mask are common in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) commencing continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Recently, nasal pillows have been designed to overcome these issues. Limited evidence exists of the benefits and effectiveness of these devices. Twenty-one patients (19 male, 49+/-10years) with the established diagnosis of OSAS [apnoea/hypopnoea index (AHI): 52+/-22] and who had a successful CPAP titration were commenced on CPAP therapy (10+/-2cmH2O), and randomized to 4weeks of a nasal pillow (P) and a standard nasal mask (M) in a crossover design. Outcome measures were objective compliance, AHI, quality of life, Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS) and CPAP side-effects. There was no difference in compliance (M versus P: 5.1+/-1.9h versus 5.0+/-1.7h; P=0.701) and AHI (2.6+/-2.7 versus 3.0+/-2.9; P=0.509). Quality of life and ESS improved with CPAP, but there was no difference in the extent of improvement between both devices. Usage of nasal pillows resulted in less reported pressure on the face and more subjects found the nasal pillow the more comfortable device. However, there was no clear overall preference for either device at the end of the study (mask=57%, pillow=43%; P=0.513). The applied CPAP pressure did not correlate with compliance, AHI and ESS. Furthermore, no differences in outcome parameters were noted comparing groups with CPAP pressure <10 and >/=10cm H(2) O. Nasal pillows are equally effective in CPAP therapy, but do not generally lead to improved compliance.
Language:
eng
MeSH:
Adult; Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/*adverse effects/*instrumentation; Equipment Design; Female; Humans; Male; Masks/*adverse effects; Middle Aged; Nose Diseases/*prevention & control; Patient Compliance/psychology; Patient Satisfaction; Pressure Ulcer/*prevention & control; Quality of Life/psychology; Questionnaires; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/*therapy
ISSN:
1365-2869 (Electronic); 0962-1105 (Linking)

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorRyan, Silkeen_GB
dc.contributor.authorGarvey, John Fen_GB
dc.contributor.authorSwan, Valerieen_GB
dc.contributor.authorBehan, Renataen_GB
dc.contributor.authorMcNicholas, Walter Ten_GB
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-01T10:33:12Z-
dc.date.available2012-02-01T10:33:12Z-
dc.date.issued2012-02-01T10:33:12Z-
dc.identifier.citationJ Sleep Res. 2011 Jun;20(2):367-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2869.2010.00873.x.en_GB
dc.identifier.issn1365-2869 (Electronic)en_GB
dc.identifier.issn0962-1105 (Linking)en_GB
dc.identifier.pmid20673292en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1365-2869.2010.00873.xen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/207624-
dc.description.abstractSide-effects directly due to the nasal mask are common in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) commencing continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Recently, nasal pillows have been designed to overcome these issues. Limited evidence exists of the benefits and effectiveness of these devices. Twenty-one patients (19 male, 49+/-10years) with the established diagnosis of OSAS [apnoea/hypopnoea index (AHI): 52+/-22] and who had a successful CPAP titration were commenced on CPAP therapy (10+/-2cmH2O), and randomized to 4weeks of a nasal pillow (P) and a standard nasal mask (M) in a crossover design. Outcome measures were objective compliance, AHI, quality of life, Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS) and CPAP side-effects. There was no difference in compliance (M versus P: 5.1+/-1.9h versus 5.0+/-1.7h; P=0.701) and AHI (2.6+/-2.7 versus 3.0+/-2.9; P=0.509). Quality of life and ESS improved with CPAP, but there was no difference in the extent of improvement between both devices. Usage of nasal pillows resulted in less reported pressure on the face and more subjects found the nasal pillow the more comfortable device. However, there was no clear overall preference for either device at the end of the study (mask=57%, pillow=43%; P=0.513). The applied CPAP pressure did not correlate with compliance, AHI and ESS. Furthermore, no differences in outcome parameters were noted comparing groups with CPAP pressure <10 and >/=10cm H(2) O. Nasal pillows are equally effective in CPAP therapy, but do not generally lead to improved compliance.en_GB
dc.language.isoengen_GB
dc.subject.meshAdulten_GB
dc.subject.meshContinuous Positive Airway Pressure/*adverse effects/*instrumentationen_GB
dc.subject.meshEquipment Designen_GB
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_GB
dc.subject.meshHumansen_GB
dc.subject.meshMaleen_GB
dc.subject.meshMasks/*adverse effectsen_GB
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_GB
dc.subject.meshNose Diseases/*prevention & controlen_GB
dc.subject.meshPatient Compliance/psychologyen_GB
dc.subject.meshPatient Satisfactionen_GB
dc.subject.meshPressure Ulcer/*prevention & controlen_GB
dc.subject.meshQuality of Life/psychologyen_GB
dc.subject.meshQuestionnairesen_GB
dc.subject.meshSleep Apnea, Obstructive/*therapyen_GB
dc.titleNasal pillows as an alternative interface in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome initiating continuous positive airway pressure therapy.en_GB
dc.contributor.departmentSleep Research Laboratory, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalJournal of sleep researchen_GB
dc.description.provinceLeinster-
All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.