A multisite randomized trial of portable sleep studies and positive airway pressure autotitration versus laboratory-based polysomnography for the diagnosis and treatment of obstructive sleep apnea: The HomePAP study

Carol L. Rosen, Dennis Auckley, Ruth Benca, Nancy Foldvary-Schaefer, Conrad Iber, Vishesh Kapur, Michael Rueschman, Phyllis Zee, Susan Redline

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

176 Scopus citations

Abstract

Study Objectives: To test the utility of an integrated clinical pathway for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) diagnosis and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment using portable monitoring devices. Design: Randomized, open-label, parallel group, unblinded, multicenter clinical trial comparing home-based, unattended portable monitoring for diagnosis and autotitrating CPAP (autoPAP) compared with in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG) and CPAP titration. Setting: Seven American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) accredited sleep centers. Participants: Consecutive new referrals, age 18 yr or older with high probability of moderate to severe OSA (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] ≥ 15) identified by clinical algorithm and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score ≥ 12. Interventions: Home-based level 3 testing followed by 1 wk of autoPAP with a fixed pressure CPAP prescription based on the 90% pressure from autotitration of PAP therapy (autoPAP) device (HOME) compared with attended, in-laboratory studies (LAB). Measurements: CPAP acceptance, time to treatment, adherence at 1 and 3 mo; changes in ESS, and functional outcomes. Results: Of 373 participants, approximately one-half in each study arm remained eligible (AHI ≥ 15) to continue in the study. At 3 mo, PAP usage (nightly time at pressure) was 1 hr greater: 4.7 ± 2.1 hr (HOME) compared with 3.7 ± 2.4 hr (LAB). Adherence (percentage of night used ≥ 4 hr) was 12.6% higher: 62.8 ± 29.2% compared with 49.4 ± 36.1% in the HOME versus LAB. Acceptance of PAP therapy, titration pressures, effective titrations, time to treatment, and ESS score change did not differ between arms. Conclusions: A home-based strategy for diagnosis and treatment compared with in-laboratory PSG was not inferior in terms of acceptance, adherence, time to treatment, and functional improvements. Trial Registration: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT: 00642486.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)757-767
Number of pages11
JournalSleep
Volume35
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2012

Keywords

  • Autotitration
  • Diagnosis
  • OSA
  • Portable monitoring
  • Randomized clinical trial

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A multisite randomized trial of portable sleep studies and positive airway pressure autotitration versus laboratory-based polysomnography for the diagnosis and treatment of obstructive sleep apnea: The HomePAP study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this