A randomized controlled trial of nurse-led care for symptomatic moderate-severe obstructive sleep apnea.

Adelaide Institute for Sleep Health, RGH, 202-16 Daws Road, Daw Park, SA 5041, Australia.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine (Impact Factor: 11.04). 02/2009; 179(6):501-8. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200810-1558OC
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a prevalent disease. Often limited clinical resources result in long patient waiting lists. Simpler validated methods of care are needed.
To demonstrate that a nurse-led model of care can produce health outcomes in symptomatic moderate-severe OSA not inferior to physician-led care.
A randomized controlled multicenter noninferiority clinical trial was performed. Of 1,427 potentially eligible patients at 3 centers, 882 consented to the trial. Of these, 263 were excluded on the basis of clinical criteria. Of the remaining 619, 195 met home oximetry criteria for high-probability moderate-severe OSA and were randomized to 2 models of care: model A, the simplified model, using home autoadjusting positive airway pressure to set therapeutic continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), with all care supervised by an experienced nurse; and model B, involving two laboratory polysomnograms to diagnose and treat OSA, with clinical care supervised by a sleep physician. The primary end point was change in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score after 3 months of CPAP. Other outcome measures were collected.
For the primary outcome change in ESS score, nurse-led management was no worse than physician-led management (4.02 vs. 4.15; difference, -0.13; 95% confidence interval: -1.52, 1.25) given a prespecified noninferiority margin of -2 for the lower 95% confidence interval. There were also no differences between both groups in CPAP adherence at 3 months or other outcome measures. Within-trial costs were significantly less in model A.
A simplified nurse-led model of care has demonstrated noninferior results to physician-directed care in the management of symptomatic moderate-severe OSA, while being less costly. Clinical trial registered with (ACTRN012605000064606).

  • 09/2014; 6(9):E200-E201. DOI:10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2014.09.08
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The increasing prevalence and recognition of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) coupled with an awareness of its detrimental health consequences has resulted in the need for timely and cost efficient access to diagnostic sleep testing and treatment. As a result, increased emphasis is being placed on simplified ambulatory models for the diagnosis and treatment of OSA using home sleep testing (HST). An ambulatory sleep program requires the combination of clinical assessment for identifying patients at high risk for OSA, HST for the diagnosis of OSA, and home auto-titrating positive airway pressure units for treatment. Randomized control trials evaluating the efficacy of this ambulatory approach to diagnose and treat OSA in high-risk patients without significant medical comorbidities reveal the potential for equivalent patient outcomes when compared with the use of polysomnography and in-laboratory continuous positive airway pressure titration.
    Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 10/2014; 35(5):552-9. DOI:10.1055/s-0034-1390066 · 2.75 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has been steadily rising over recent decades and patient access to laboratory-based sleep services and specialist consultations have become increasingly limited, resulting in potential delays in treatment. As a result, there has been growing interest in the use of non-sleep laboratory methods for diagnosing and managing OSA, including the use of screening questionnaires, portable sleep monitoring devices, and home autotitrating continuous positive airway pressure. There is also evidence in support of a role for alternative health care professionals, such as sleep-trained nurses and primary care physicians in the diagnosis and treatment of OSA. In this review, we compare the different types of home monitoring devices, discuss the limitations of portable monitoring compared with full laboratory polysomnography, and summarize the results from published comparative effectiveness studies which have evaluated ambulatory models of care for the management of OSA. We also consider how future models of care that may be needed to deal with the burden of disease will evolve and some of the issues that prevent the translation of such models of care in many countries.
    Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 10/2014; 35(5):545-51. DOI:10.1055/s-0034-1390139 · 2.75 Impact Factor