Acoustic reflection for nasal airway measurement in patients with obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome

Department of Sleep Medicine, Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, UK.
Sleep (Impact Factor: 4.59). 12/2005; 28(12):1554-9.
Source: PubMed


To measure nasal dimensions and explore relationships between these and patients' use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS).
Prospective single-blind study.
A tertiary-care, sleep disorders referral center. Patients: Sixty OSAHS patients (52 men, mean age 51 years, body mass index (BMI) 36.1 +/- 9.4 kg/m2).
After in-vitro validation, acoustic reflection was used to measure the nasal minimal cross-sectional area (MCSA), mean area, and volume in OSAHS patients receiving CPAP treatment. Variables from sleep studies included the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), titration pressure, and CPAP use (hours per night) after 3 months. Median MCSA was used to categorize subjects into small and large MCSA groups. Correlation and regression analyses were conducted to investigate the relationship between results of polysomnography and nasal acoustic reflection.
At baseline the small and large MCSA groups were not different (P > .05) in BMI, age, mask type, or previous nasal stuffiness, but there were more women in the smaller MCSA group (P = .02). CPAP use was significantly lower in the small MCSA group (P = .007), but apnea-hypopnea index and titration pressure were indistinguishable between the 2 groups. Furthermore, CPAP use correlated significantly and positively with MCSA (r = 0.34, P = .008), mean area (r = 0.27, P = .04), and volume (r = 0.28, P = .03). Step-wise multiple regression models revealed that MCSA was a predictor of the CPAP compliance (R2 = 0.16, P = .002), and MCSA (P = .001) and age (P = .04) were predictive factors of CPAP compliance (R2= 0.22). Nasal dimensions were not related to subjective nasal stuffiness.
CPAP use in patients with smaller nasal passages was lower than in those with larger passages. Objective measurement of nasal dimension may be more reliable than subjective self-report of nasal symptoms in identifying patients with OSAHS who might struggle with CPAP therapy.

Download full-text


Available from: Chung-Yao Hsu, Mar 16, 2015
35 Reads
  • Source
    • "Reeves-Hoche, 1994, 23 Rauscher, 1991, a,14 Waldhorn, 1990 a,82 Some studies indicate symptomatic severity is related to increased use, but the improvement in severity seems to be a stronger predictor (see below) Decrease Edinger, 1994 a,81 No difference Pieh, 2013, 50 Wallace, 2013, 51 Bakker, 2011, 52 Gagnadoux, 2011, 53 Lettieri, 2011, 55 Platt, 2011, 87 Sawyer, 2011, 56 Galetke, 2011, 54 Ye, 2012,* 57 Kohler, 2010, a,58 Kreivi, 2010, a,97 Nguyen, 2010, 59 Amfilouchil, 2009, 44 Baron, 2009, 60 Poulet, 2009, 63 Simon-Tuval, 2009, a,46 So, 2009, a,61 Sopkova, 2009, 62 Berry, 2008, 112 , Olsen, 2008,* ,64 Budhiraja, 2007, 24 Kaplan, 2007, a,123 Richards, 2007, 35 Sugiura, 2007, a,66 Morris, 2006, a,67 Aloia, 2005, 68 Lewis, 2004, 70 Stepnowsky, 2002,* ,114 McFayden, 2001, 75 Sage, 2001, 77 Sanders, 2000, 79 Weaver, 1997, 80 Engleman, 1994, 103 Kribbs, 1993, 9 Rauscher, 1993 108 Nasal resistance/upper airway obstruction (ref ¼ increased resistance) Decrease So, 2009, a,61 Amfilochiou, 2009, 44 Sugiura, 2007, a,66 Morris, 2006, a,67 Li, 2005, 47 Nakata, 2005, 133 Objective, but not subjective obstruction is related to CPAP adherence. This variable might be more important in the initial acceptance rather than long-term CPAP use No difference Kreivi, 2010, a,97 Chasens, 2005, 69 Hollandt, 2003, 73 Brander, 1999 95 Symptomatic improvement (ref ¼ increased improvement) Increase Crawford, 2012, 134 Weaver, 2007, 10 Wallace, 2013, 51 Antic, 2011, 135 Kreivi, 2010, a,97 Simon-Tuval, 2009, a,46 Wells, 2007, 113 Lewis, 2004, 70 Hollandt, 2003, 73 Sin, 2002, 18 Ball, 2001, a,74 McFayden, 2001, 75 Kingshott, 2000, 136 Rosenthal, 2000, 137 Pepin, 1999, 26 Meslier, 1998, 22 Engleman, 1996, a,102 Meurice, 1994, 16 Rauscher, 1993, 108 Kribbs, 1993, 9 Hoffstein, 1992 a,104 Despite the evidence for a dose-response relationship between adherence and symptomatic improvements, the direction of this relationship remains unclear, does increased use lead to increased improvements, or do improvements fuel the motivation to use the machine? "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To date, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the most effective intervention in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea, but adherence to this treatment is often less than optimal. A variety of factors and interventions that influence and improve CPAP use have been examined. There is increasing recognition of the multifaceted nature of CPAP adherence: the patient's psychological profile and social environment have been recognised, in addition to the more extensively researched patient's treatment and physiological profile. Understanding how these multiple factors impact on CPAP use in an integrative fashion might provide us with a useful holistic model of CPAP adherence. This concept of integration - a biopsychosocial (BPS) approach to health and illness - has previously been described to understand care provision for various chronic health disorders. This paper proposes an adherence framework, whereby variables integrally affect CPAP use. The BPS model has been considered for nearly 35 years; the presence of poor CPAP adherence was acknowledged in the early 1990s - it is timely to incorporate this approach into our care pathway of CPAP users.
    Sleep Medicine Reviews 05/2013; 18(2). DOI:10.1016/j.smrv.2013.03.002 · 8.51 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this review is to discuss the nature of adherence to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), identify measurement modalities, consider factors that have been identified in the literature associated with nonadherence and present interventions that may promote use. Patient characteristics associated with CPAP adherence include self-reported daytime sleepiness, level of disease severity, nasal resistance and perception of symptomatic benefit. Heated humidification and flexible pressure also promote use. Feelings of claustrophobia affect adherence in a small proportion of patients. Adherence was better with nasal mask than nasal pillows and full face mask and equal to oral interface. Patients who employed an active coping style and those with perceived self-efficacy, especially following exposure to treatment, had higher levels of adherence. A videotape targeted to improve self-efficacy and other interventions to enhance cognitions related to CPAP has generated greater use. Intensive support utilizing several days of titration, education and home visits also improves adherence. Adherence to CPAP treatment is an important clinical issue that needs to be routinely assessed and addressed. Frequent patient contact to troubleshoot problems will contribute to adherence. Further study is needed to identify factors that affect adherence and cost-effective interventions.
    Current opinion in pulmonary medicine 12/2006; 12(6):409-13. DOI:10.1097/01.mcp.0000245715.97256.32 · 2.76 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The standard for the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is polysomnography (PSG). Although PSG helps identify individuals who have OSA and guides medical management, it does not identify the obstruction site or predict surgical results. Radiologic and diagnostic studies have been used to direct surgical intervention and predict outcomes of sleep apnea surgery. These studies include lateral cephalometric radiographs, CT, MRI, asleep fluoroscopy, asleep and awake endoscopy, upper airway manometry, and acoustic reflection techniques. The ideal diagnostic study would identify individuals who have OSA, be cost-effective and readily accessible, and guide therapeutic, site-specific intervention with predictable results. In this article, the various modalities are reviewed in terms of their capability to effectively diagnose and guide treatment of OSA.
    Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America 09/2007; 40(4):785-805. DOI:10.1016/j.otc.2007.04.005 · 1.49 Impact Factor
Show more