A Sleep Position Trainer for positional sleep apnea: a randomized, controlled trial

Positional Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Positional sleep apnea (POSA), a distinctive subtype of obstructive sleep apnea, underscores the critical influence of a patient's sleeping position on the severity of their condition. In the management of POSA, compliance with positional therapy (PT) is paramount, as it wields a profound impact on the treatment's efficacy and the overall alleviation of the disease. The advent of new-generation PT devices offers a promising alternative to conventional methods like the tennis ball technique, boasting higher compliance rates and substantial disease alleviation.

A review of supine position related obstructive sleep apnea: Classification, epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment

Supine related obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is the most common clinical and physiological phenotype of OSA. This condition is recognizable by patients, their families and through polysomnographic recordings. Commonly used definitions distinguish the presence of supine related OSA when respiratory events occur at twice the frequency when the patient lies in the supine compared to non-supine sleeping positions. Recent physiology studies have demonstrated that airway obstruction arises more commonly in the supine position particularly at the level of the soft palate and epiglottis. Increased airway collapsibility is reliability observed supine relative to lateral position. To a lesser extent, changes in control of breathing favour less stable ventilation when the supine sleeping posture is adopted. Many treatments have been developed and trialled to help patients avoid sleeping on their back. The last 10 years has seen the emergence of vibrotactile warning devices that are worn on the patients' neck or chest. High quality randomized controlled trial data is accumulating on the efficacy and common pitfalls of the application of these treatments.

Efficacy of vibrotactile positional therapy devices on patients with positional obstructive sleep apnoea: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Vibrotactile positional therapy (PT) devices are a new treatment modality for positional obstructive sleep apnoea (POSA). This review aimed to determine the effect of vibrotactile PT on the Apnoea Hypopnoea Index (AHI) and the percentage of time spent in the supine position (%Tsupine) in patients with POSA, compared with baseline. Secondary aims were to investigate the effect on daytime sleepiness, quality of life and sleep quality.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that investigated the effect of vibrotactile PT in POSA patients. Searches were performed via MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Embase up to 29 October 2022.

RESULTS

1119 studies were identified, 18 studies met the inclusion criteria (10 RCTs, 8 cohort studies). The use of vibrotactile PT significantly reduced the AHI at follow-up compared with baseline (mean difference (95% CI) -9.19 events/hour (-11.68 to -6.70); p<0.00001). The mean %Tsupine was also significantly reduced (mean difference (95% CI) -32.79% (-38.75% to -26.83%); p<0.00001). The percentage changes in the AHI and %Tsupine were 43% and 70%, respectively. Secondary outcomes were daytime sleepiness, quality of life and sleep indices. These showed minimal change, although follow-up was short.

CONCLUSION

Vibrotactile PT devices are effective in treating POSA; reducing both AHI and %Tsupine. The effect on sleep quality, daytime sleepiness and disease-specific quality of life was minimal. However, there were limited data and follow-up was often brief, meaning that further research is needed to determine the effect of vibrotactile PT on patient-centred outcomes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020188617.

International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea

BACKGROUND

Evaluation and interpretation of the literature on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) allows for consolidation and determination of the key factors important for clinical management of the adult OSA patient. Toward this goal, an international collaborative of multidisciplinary experts in sleep apnea evaluation and treatment have produced the International Consensus statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (ICS:OSA).

METHODS

Using previously defined methodology, focal topics in OSA were assigned as literature review (LR), evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBR-R) formats. Each topic incorporated the available and relevant evidence which was summarized and graded on study quality. Each topic and section underwent iterative review and the ICS:OSA was created and reviewed by all authors for consensus.

RESULTS

The ICS:OSA addresses OSA syndrome definitions, pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors for disease, screening methods, diagnostic testing types, multiple treatment modalities, and effects of OSA treatment on multiple OSA-associated comorbidities. Specific focus on outcomes with positive airway pressure (PAP) and surgical treatments were evaluated.

CONCLUSION

This review of the literature consolidates the available knowledge and identifies the limitations of the current evidence on OSA. This effort aims to create a resource for OSA evidence-based practice and identify future research needs. Knowledge gaps and research opportunities include improving the metrics of OSA disease, determining the optimal OSA screening paradigms, developing strategies for PAP adherence and longitudinal care, enhancing selection of PAP alternatives and surgery, understanding health risk outcomes, and translating evidence into individualized approaches to therapy.

Patient compliance and satisfaction with a new forehead device for positional obstructive sleep apnoea treatment: a post hoc analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The influence of body position in obstructive sleep apnoea patients is well known. A positional therapy device placed at the forehead has proven to be effective in reducing the severity of positional obstructive sleep apnoea (POSA) symptoms. The aim of the study was to evaluate patients' therapy compliance and satisfaction in the short term and mid-term.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis of a randomised controlled trial was conducted using an inactive device (ID) or an active device (AD) for 3 months. The primary outcomes were device usage and the percentage of patients with good compliance (defined as device use for more than 4 hours per night and more than 70% of nights per week). Secondary outcomes included time spent with head in the supine position, patient satisfaction and side effects.

RESULTS

The median duration of using the device was 6.9 hours in the ID group and 6.7 hours in the AD group (p=0.309), and the durations were similar throughout the follow-up period and from the first day of use. The percentage of patients with good compliance was similar and greater than 60% in both groups. The median time spent with head in the supine position was significantly lower in the AD group (2.9%) than in the ID group (12.4%) since the first day of treatment. Both groups showed satisfaction scores values above 8.5 (out of 10) in all items, while side effects were scarcely reported.

CONCLUSION

High device compliance was achieved in POSA patients, both in terms of device usage time and percentage of days used. Patients were highly satisfied, and the device effectively reduced the time spent with the head in the supine position from the first day of use.

Comparing the diagnostic value of the positional obstructive sleep apnea definitions

Several definitions were proposed to diagnose Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea (pOSA). However, the comparison between these definitions according to their diagnostic value is scarce in the literature. Thus, we decided to conduct this study to compare between the four criteria according to their diagnostic value. Between 2016 and 2022, 1092 sleep studies were performed at the sleep lab at the Jordan University Hospital. Patients who had an AHI <5 were excluded. pOSA was described according to the four definitions; Amsterdam Positional OSA Classification (APOC), supine AHI twice the non-supine AHI (Cartwright), Cartwright plus the non-supine AHI <5 (Mador), and overall AHI severity at least 1.4 times the non-supine severity (Overall/NS-AHI). Furthermore, 1033 polysomnographic sleep studies were retrospectively analyzed. The prevalence of pOSA according to the reference rule was 49.9% among our sample. The Overall/Non-Supine definition had the highest sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value, which were 83.5%, 99.81%, 99.77%, and 85.88% respectively. The Overall/Non-Supine definition also had the highest accuracy among the four definitions (91.68%). Our study showed that all the criteria had a diagnostic accuracy above 50%, indicating that they were accurate in forming the diagnosis of pOSA. The Overall/Non-Supine criteria had the highest sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and positive likelihood ratio as well as the lowest negative likelihood ratio, indicating the superiority of this criterion over the other definitions. Choosing the right criteria for diagnosing pOSA would result in fewer patients being assigned to CPAP and more being assigned to positional therapy methods.

The effect of wearable-delivered sleep interventions on sleep outcomes among adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aims of the review were to (i) evaluate the effectiveness of wearable-delivered sleep interventions on sleep outcomes among adults, and (ii) explore the effect of factors affecting total sleep time. Eight databases were searched to identify relevant studies in English from inception until December 23, 2021. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2.0 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria were used to assess the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence, respectively. Twenty randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, involving 1608 adults across nine countries. Wearable-delivered sleep interventions elicited significant improvement of 1.96 events/h for the oxygen desaturation index and 3.13 events/h for the respiratory distress index. Meta-analyses found that wearable-delivered sleep interventions significantly decreased sleep disturbance (Hedges' g [g] = -0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.59, -0.15) and sleep-related impairment (g = -1.06, 95% CI: -1.99, -0.13) versus the comparators. The wearable-delivered sleep interventions may complement usual care to improve sleep outcomes. More rigorous RCTs with a long-term assessment in a wide range of populations are warranted.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Exploring Safety and Tolerability of Sulthiame in Sleep Apnea

RATIONAL

Current therapies in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are limited by insufficient efficacy, compliance or tolerability. An effective pharmacological treatment in OSA is warranted. Carbonic anhydrase (CA) inhibition has been shown to ameliorate OSA.

OBJECTIVE

To explore safety and tolerability of the CA inhibitor sulthiame (STM) in OSA.

METHODS

A four week double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled dose guiding trial in patients with moderate/severe OSA not tolerating positive airway pressure treatment.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Intermittent paresthesia was reported by 79, 67 and 18% of patients receiving 400 mg STM (N=34), 200 mg STM (N=12) or placebo (N=22), respectively. Dyspnea was reported only after 400 mg STM (18%). Six patients in the higher dose group withdrew due to an adverse event. There were no serious adverse events. STM reduced the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) from 55.3 to 33.1 events/h ( 41.0%) in the 400 mg group and from 61.2 to 40.7 events/h ( 32.1%) after 200 mg (p<0.001, respectively). Corresponding placebo values were 53.9 and 50.9 events/h ( 5.4 %). The AHI reduction threshold of ≥50% was reached in 40% after 400 mg, 25% after 200 mg and 5% following placebo. Mean overnight oxygen saturation improved by 1.1% after 400 mg and 200 mg (p<0.001 and p=0.034, respectively). Patient related outcomes were unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

STM showed a satisfactory safety profile in moderate/severe OSA. STM reduced OSA by more than 20 events/h, one of the strongest reductions reported in a drug trial in OSA. Larger scale clinical studies of STM in OSA are justified. Clinical trial registration available at https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/, ID: 2017-004767-13.

Sleep Apnea Syndrome (SAS) Clinical Practice Guidelines 2020

The prevalence of sleep disordered breathing (SDB) is reportedly very high. Among SDBs, the incidence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is higher than previously believed, with patients having moderate-to-severe OSA accounting for approximately 20% of adult males and 10% of postmenopausal women not only in Western countries but also in Eastern countries, including Japan. Since 1998, when health insurance coverage became available, the number of patients using continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy for sleep apnea has increased sharply, with the number of patients about to exceed 500,000 in Japan. Although the "Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Sleep Apnea Syndrome (SAS) in Adults" was published in 2005, a new guideline was prepared in order to indicate the standard medical care based on the latest trends, as supervised by and in cooperation with the Japanese Respiratory Society and the "Survey and Research on Refractory Respiratory Diseases and Pulmonary Hypertension" Group, of Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare and other related academic societies, including the Japanese Society of Sleep Research, in addition to referring to the previous guidelines. Because sleep apnea is an interdisciplinary field covering many areas, this guideline was prepared including 36 clinical questions (CQs). In the English version, therapies and managements for SAS, which were written from CQ16 to 36, were shown. The Japanese version was published in July 2020 and permitted as well as published as one of the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (Minds) clinical practice guidelines in Japan in July 2021.

Sleep Apnea Syndrome (SAS) Clinical Practice Guidelines 2020

The prevalence of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is reportedly very high. Among SDBs, the incidence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is higher than previously believed, with patients having moderate-to-severe OSA accounting for approximately 20% of adult males and 10% of postmenopausal women not only in Western countries but also in Eastern countries, including Japan. Since 1998, when health insurance coverage became available, the number of patients using continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy for sleep apnea has increased sharply, with the number of patients about to exceed 500,000 in Japan. Although the "Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Sleep Apnea Syndrome (SAS) in Adults" was published in 2005, a new guideline was prepared to indicate the standard medical care based on the latest trends, as supervised by and in cooperation with the Japanese Respiratory Society and the "Survey and Research on Refractory Respiratory Diseases and Pulmonary Hypertension" Group, of Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare and other related academic societies, including the Japanese Society of Sleep Research, in addition to referring to the previous guidelines. Since sleep apnea is an interdisciplinary field covering many areas, this guideline was prepared including 36 clinical questions (CQs). In the English version, therapies and managements for SAS, which were written from CQ16 to 36, were shown. The Japanese version was published in July 2020 and permitted as well as published as one of the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (Minds) clinical practice guidelines in Japan in July 2021.

SleepPos App: An Automated Smartphone Application for Angle Based High Resolution Sleep Position Monitoring and Treatment

Poor sleep quality or disturbed sleep is associated with multiple health conditions. Sleep position affects the severity and occurrence of these complications, and positional therapy is one of the less invasive treatments to deal with them. Sleep positions can be self-reported, which is unreliable, or determined by using specific devices, such as polysomnography, polygraphy or cameras, that can be expensive and difficult to employ at home. The aim of this study is to determine how smartphones could be used to monitor and treat sleep position at home. We divided our research into three tasks: (1) develop an Android smartphone application ('SleepPos' app) which monitors angle-based high-resolution sleep position and allows to simultaneously apply positional treatment; (2) test the smartphone application at home coupled with a pulse oximeter; and (3) explore the potential of this tool to detect the positional occurrence of desaturation events. The results show how the 'SleepPos' app successfully determined the sleep position and revealed positional patterns of occurrence of desaturation events. The 'SleepPos' app also succeeded in applying positional therapy and preventing the subjects from sleeping in the supine sleep position. This study demonstrates how smartphones are capable of reliably monitoring high-resolution sleep position and provide useful clinical information about the positional occurrence of desaturation events.

Positional obstructive sleep apnea within a large multicenter French cohort: prevalence, characteristics, and treatment outcomes

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To assess, in a large cohort of patients with obstructive sleep apnea, the factors that are independently associated with positional obstructive sleep apnea (POSA) and exclusive POSA (e-POSA) and determine their prevalence. The secondary objective was to evaluate the outcome of positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy for patients with POSA and e-POSA.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 6,437 patients with typical mild-to-severe OSA from the Pays de la Loire sleep cohort. Patients with POSA and e-POSA were compared to those with non-POSA for clinical and polysomnographic characteristics. In a subgroup of patients (n = 3,000) included in a PAP follow-up analysis, we determined whether POSA and e-POSA phenotypes were associated with treatment outcomes at 6 months.

RESULTS

POSA and e-POSA had a prevalence of 53.5% and 20.1%, respectively, and were independently associated with time in supine position, male sex, younger age, lower apnea-hypopnea index and lower body mass index. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with POSA and e-POSA had a significantly lower likelihood of treatment adherence (PAP daily use ≥ 4 h) at 6 months and were at higher risk of PAP treatment withdrawal compared to those with non-POSA.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence and independent predictors of POSA and e-POSA were determined in this large clinical population. Patients with POSA and e-POSA have lower PAP therapy adherence, and this choice of treatment may not be optimal. Thus, there is a need to offer these patients an alternative therapy.

Enhanced Monitoring of Sleep Position in Sleep Apnea Patients: Smartphone Triaxial Accelerometry Compared with Video-Validated Position from Polysomnography

Poor sleep quality is a risk factor for multiple mental, cardiovascular, and cerebrovascular diseases. Certain sleep positions or excessive position changes can be related to some diseases and poor sleep quality. Nevertheless, sleep position is usually classified into four discrete values: supine, prone, left and right. An increase in sleep position resolution is necessary to better assess sleep position dynamics and to interpret more accurately intermediate sleep positions. This research aims to study the feasibility of smartphones as sleep position monitors by (1) developing algorithms to retrieve the sleep position angle from smartphone accelerometry; (2) monitoring the sleep position angle in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); (3) comparing the discretized sleep angle versus the four classic sleep positions obtained by the video-validated polysomnography (PSG); and (4) analyzing the presence of positional OSA (pOSA) related to its sleep angle of occurrence. Results from 19 OSA patients reveal that a higher resolution sleep position would help to better diagnose and treat patients with position-dependent diseases such as pOSA. They also show that smartphones are promising mHealth tools for enhanced position monitoring at hospitals and home, as they can provide sleep position with higher resolution than the gold-standard video-validated PSG.

New forehead device in positional obstructive sleep apnoea: a randomised clinical trial

RATIONALE

Approximately 60% of the patients with obstructive sleep apnoea suffer from a positional effect, and approximately 25% of these patients present events only in the supine position.

OBJECTIVE

To validate a new positional vibrating device and evaluate its efficacy in reducing the Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index and the total sleep time in the supine position without disturbing sleep.

METHODS

A total of 128 patients were recruited for this multicentre, prospective, parallel, randomised controlled trial and were distributed in three arms (general recommendations, inactive and active device). Full overnight polysomnography was performed at baseline and at 12 weeks. Anthropometric variables and sleep and quality of life questionnaires were collected at 4, 8 and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index decreased from 30.6 per hour to 20.4 per hour (p<0.001) in the active device (AD) group. In this group the reduction was 2.3-fold and 3.3-fold than the ones in the general recommendations (GR) and inactive device (ID) groups, respectively (p=0.014). Sleep time in supine position decreased 17.7%±26.3% in GR group (p<0.001), 13.0%±22.4% with ID group (p<0.001) and 21.0%±25.6% in the AD group (p<0.001). Furthermore, total sleep time increased significantly only in the AD group (22.1±57.5 min, p=0.016), with an increased percentage of time in the N3 (deep sleep) and N3+REM (rapid eye movement) stages, without sleep fragmentation.

CONCLUSION

The device was effective in reducing the Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index and time spent in the supine position also in improving sleep architecture. Therefore, the device could be a good option for the management of patients with positional obstructive sleep apnoea.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS

The trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03336515).

Standardized framework to report on the role of sleeping position in sleep apnea patients

PURPOSE

Sleep apnea is a multifactorial illness which can be differentiated in various physiological phenotypes as a result of both anatomical and non-anatomical contributors (e.g., low respiratory arousal threshold, high loop gain). In addition, the frequency and duration of apneas, in the majority of patients with OSA, are influenced by sleeping position. Differences in characteristics between non-positional patients (NPP) and positional patients (PP) suggest another crucial phenotype distinction, a clinical phenotype focusing on the role of sleeping position on sleep apnea. Since this clinical phenotype distinction has therapeutic implications, further research is necessary to better understand the pathophysiology behind this phenotypic trait and to improve management of PP. Therefore, we suggest a standardized framework that emphasizes the role of sleeping position when reporting clinical and research data on sleep apnea.

METHODS

We identified 5 key topics whereby a standardized framework to report on the role of sleeping position would be of added value: (1) sleep study data, (2) anatomical, morphological and physiological factors, (3) drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) findings, (4) sleep apnea management, and (5) effectiveness versus efficacy of positional therapy in sleep apnea management. We performed a literature search to identify evidence to describe and support the rationale behind these 5 main recommendations.

RESULTS

In this paper, we present the rationale behind this construct and present specific recommendations such as reporting sleep study indices (disease severity) and sleep time spent in various sleeping positions. The same is suggested for DISE findings and effect of treatment. Sleep study indices (disease severity), anatomical, morphological, and physiological factors in sleep apnea patients should be reported separately for PP and NPP.

CONCLUSION

Applying these suggestions in future research will improve patient care, assist in better understanding of this dominant phenotype, and will enhance accurate comparisons across studies and future investigations.

Positional Therapy for Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Positional therapy appears to be an attractive strategy for many patients with positional obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, under the American Academy of Sleep Medicine OSA guidelines, positional therapy is considered as only an alternative therapy, because previous research has demonstrated poor treatment tolerance and adherence. Recent technological advances have renewed interest in positional therapy, with the invention of new sophisticated vibratory positional therapy devices. These devices have shown great promise with efficacy, markedly improved patient tolerance, and long-term adherence. We review the literature on positional therapy and explore the most current evidence on the new positional therapy devices.

Positional therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea

BACKGROUND

The modalities of therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) include behavioural and lifestyle modifications, positional therapy, oral appliances, surgery and continuous positive airway pressure therapy (CPAP). Though CPAP has proven efficacy in treating OSA, adherence with CPAP therapy is suboptimal. Positional therapy (to keep people sleeping on their side) is less invasive and therefore expected to have better adherence. This review considered the efficacy of positional therapy compared to CPAP as well as positional therapy against no positional therapy. Devices designed for positional therapy include lumbar or abdominal binders, semi-rigid backpacks, full-length pillows, a tennis ball attached to the back of nightwear, and electrical sensors with alarms that indicate change in position.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of positional therapy versus CPAP and positional therapy versus inactive control (sham intervention or no positional therapy intervention) in people with OSA.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways' Specialised Register (including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AHMED and PsycINFO), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization trials portal (ICTRP). It also contains results derived from handsearching of respiratory journals and abstract books of major annual meetings. We searched all databases from their inception to September 2018, with no restrictions on language of publication or publication type.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing positional therapy with CPAP and positional therapy with inactive control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted the data. We used a random-effects model in the meta-analysis to estimate mean differences and confidence intervals. We assessed certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies. The studies randomised 323 participants into two types of interventions. The comparison between positional therapy and CPAP included 72 participants, while the comparison between positional therapy and inactive control included 251 participants. Three studies used supine vibration alarm devices, while five studies used physical positioning like specially designed pillows or semirigid backpacks.Positional therapy versus CPAPThe three studies included for this comparison were randomised cross-over trials. Two studies found that there was no difference in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) scores between CPAP and positional therapy. Two studies showed that CPAP produced a greater reduction in Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index (AHI) with a mean difference (MD) of 6.4 events per hour (95% CI 3.00 to 9.79; low-certainty evidence) compared to positional therapy. Subjective adherence, evaluated in one study, was found to be significantly greater with positional therapy (MD 2.5 hours per night, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.59; moderate-certainty evidence).In terms of secondary outcomes, one study each reported quality-of-life indices and quality-of-sleep indices with no significant difference between the two groups. One study reported cognitive outcomes using multiple parameters and found no difference between the groups. There were insufficient data to comment on other secondary outcomes like respiratory disturbance index (RDI), and frequency and duration of nocturnal desaturation. None of the studies clearly reported adverse effects.Positional therapy versus inactive controlThree studies of positional therapy versus no intervention were randomised cross-over trials, while two studies were parallel-arm studies. Data from two studies showed that positional therapy significantly improved ESS scores (MD -1.58, 95% CI -2.89 to -0.29; moderate-certainty evidence). Positional therapy showed a reduction in AHI compared with control (MD -7.38 events per hour, 95% CI -10.06 to -4.7; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adherence. The number of participants who continued to use the device at two months was no different between the two groups (odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.94; low-certainty evidence). The same study reported adverse effects, the most common being pain in the back and chest, and sleep disturbance but there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of device discontinuation (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.5 to 3.03; low-certainty evidence). One study each reported quality-of-life indices and quality-of-sleep indices, with no significant difference between the two groups. One study reported cognitive outcome, and found no difference between the groups. There was insufficient evidence to comment on other secondary outcomes (RDI, frequency and duration of nocturnal desaturation).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The review found that CPAP has a greater effect on improving AHI compared with positional therapy in positional OSA, while positional therapy was better than inactive control for improving ESS and AHI. Positional therapy may have better adherence than CPAP. There were no significant differences for other clinically relevant outcomes such as quality of life or cognitive function. All the studies were of short duration. We are unable to comment on the long-term effects of the therapies. This is important, as most of the quality-of-life outcomes will be evident only when the therapies are given over a longer period of time. The certainty of evidence was low to moderate.

Positional Therapy for Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Positional therapy appears to be an attractive strategy for many patients with positional obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, under the American Academy of Sleep Medicine OSA guidelines, positional therapy is considered as only an alternative therapy, because previous research has demonstrated poor treatment tolerance and adherence. Recent technological advances have renewed interest in positional therapy, with the invention of new sophisticated vibratory positional therapy devices. These devices have shown great promise with efficacy, markedly improved patient tolerance, and long-term adherence. We review the literature on positional therapy and explore the most current evidence on the new positional therapy devices.

A systematic comparison of factors that could impact treatment recommendations for patients with Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea (POSA)

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

Systematically compare four criteria for Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea (POSA) based on AASM 2007 and 2012 hypopnea scoring definitions.

PATIENTS/METHODS

142 records acquired by in-home polysomnography (Sleep Profiler PSG2™) were retrospectively analyzed using AHI based on the American Academy Sleep Medicine 2007 and 2012 criteria (AHI²⁰⁰⁷ and AHI²⁰¹²). Positional obstructive sleep apnea (POSA) was characterized using four criteria: Amsterdam Positional OSA Classification (APOC), supine AHI twice the non-supine AHI (Cartwright), Cartwright plus the non-supine AHI < 5 (Mador), and the overall AHI severity at least 1.4 times the non-supine severity (Overall/NS-AHI).

RESULTS

Correlations between the Cartwright and Overall/NS-AHI criteria increased with the inclusion of a more relaxed definition of hypopneas (AHI²⁰⁰⁷ = 0.79 and AHI²⁰¹² = 0.86, P < 0.00001). The prevalence of POSA based on the Cartwright and Overall/NS-AHI criteria was approximately 60% in those with at least mild OSA by AHI²⁰⁰⁷and AHI²⁰¹². A 16% reduction in POSA prevalence for AHI²⁰¹² vs. AHI²⁰⁰⁷ was attributed to the increased incident of mild OSA. For identification of those expected to have 25% or 35% reductions in SDB severity with positional therapy, Cartwright and Overall/NS-AHI exhibited the strongest sensitivity and Overall/NS-AHI and Mador the best specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

The four criteria used to identify POSA have similarities and differences. While there were similarities between the Cartwright and Overall/NS-AHI criteria in the detection of POSA prevalence across both scoring criteria, the Overall/NS-AHI provided the most consistent detection of those most likely to demonstrate important reductions in sleep disordered breathing severity if supine sleep is avoided.