Comorbidities and quality of life in Australian men and women with diagnosed and undiagnosed high risk obstructive sleep apnea

Dyspnea and Quality of Life Improvements with Management of Comorbid Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Chronic Lung Disease

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has emerged as a significant and prevalent comorbidity associated with chronic lung diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, and interstitial lung diseases. These overlap syndromes are associated with worse patient-reported outcomes (sleep quality, quality of life measures, mental health) than each condition independently. Observational studies suggest that patients with overlap syndrome who are adherent to positive airway pressure therapy report improved quality of life, sleep quality, depression, and daytime symptoms. Screening for and management of OSA in patients with overlap syndrome should emphasize the interconnected nature of these 2 conditions and the positive impact that OSA management can have on patients' well-being and overall health.

Content Comparison of Quality-of-Life Instruments Used in Economic Evaluations of Sleep Disorder Interventions: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Assessment of quality of life (QoL) in people living with sleep disorders using questionnaires is necessary to compare intervention benefits. Knowledge of the content and concepts covered by specific QoL instruments is essential to determine which instruments are best suited for conducting economic evaluations of sleep-related interventions.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to identify the QoL instruments that have been applied in economic evaluations of sleep disorder interventions and compare their conceptual overlap and content coverage using the framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).

METHODS

A systematic review of full economic evaluations in sleep published in peer-reviewed journals from conception to 30 May, 2023 was conducted. MEDLINE, PsychInfo, ProQuest, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science and Emcare were searched for eligible studies. Studies incorporating either generic or sleep-specific QoL instruments as the primary or secondary measures of effectiveness within a full economic evaluation were included. Quality appraisal against the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Economic Evaluations and EURONHEED checklists and mapping of QoL items to ICF categories were performed by two reviewers, with a third helping settle any potential differences.

RESULTS

Sixteen instruments were identified as having been used in sleep health economic evaluations. The EQ-5D-3L, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and Insomnia Severity Index were the most widely used, but the latter two are predominantly diagnostic tools and not specifically designed to guide economic evaluations. Other instruments with broader ICF content coverage have been least used, and these include the Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index, Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire, 15 Dimensions, Short-Form 6 Dimensions, 12-item Short Form Survey, 36-item Short Form Survey and the GRID Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an overview of current QoL instruments used in economic evaluations of sleep with respect to their content coverage. A combination of generic and sleep-specific instruments with broader ICF content coverage is recommended for such evaluations.

Multi-night measurement for diagnosis and simplified monitoring of obstructive sleep apnoea

Substantial night-to-night variability in obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) severity has raised misdiagnosis and misdirected treatment concerns with the current prevailing single-night diagnostic approach. In-home, multi-night sleep monitoring technology may provide a feasible complimentary diagnostic pathway to improve both the speed and accuracy of OSA diagnosis and monitor treatment efficacy. This review describes the latest evidence on night-to-night variability in OSA severity, and its impact on OSA diagnostic misclassification. Emerging evidence for the potential impact of night-to-night variability in OSA severity to influence important health risk outcomes associated with OSA is considered. This review also characterises emerging diagnostic applications of wearable and non-wearable technologies that may provide an alternative, or complimentary, approach to traditional OSA diagnostic pathways. The required evidence to translate these devices into clinical care is also discussed. Appropriately sized randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the most appropriate and effective technologies for OSA diagnosis, as well as the optimal number of nights needed for accurate diagnosis and management. Potential risks versus benefits, patient perspectives, and cost-effectiveness of these novel approaches should be carefully considered in future trials.

Subjective HRQoL in Patients with Sleep Apnea Syndrome Who Underwent PAP Therapy in a Rehabilitation Setting: A Longitudinal Study

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is often associated with decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aims of this study were to evaluate HRQoL, the clinical and psychological profile of suspected or verified OSA patients, and the impact of PAP therapy at 1-year follow-up.

METHODS

At T0, OSA-suspected subjects underwent clinical, HRQoL, and psychological assessment. At T1, OSA patients underwent PAP therapy in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation setting. At 1 year follow-up, OSA patients were evaluated for the second time.

RESULTS

At T0, OSA patients (n = 283) and suspected OSA subjects (n = 187) differed for AHI, BMI, and ESS. At T0, the PAP-treatment group (n = 101) showed moderate-severe anxious (18.7%) and depressive (11.9%) symptoms. At 1 year follow-up (n = 59), the sleep breathing pattern had normalized and there was a reduction of ESS scores and anxious symptoms. There was also an improvement in HRQoL (0.6 ± 0.4 vs. 0.7 ± 0.5, p = 0.032; 70.4 ± 19.0 vs. 79.2 ± 20.3, p = 0.001) and in satisfaction with sleep quantity (52.3 ± 31.7 vs. 71.4 ± 26.2, p = 0.001), sleep quality (48.1 ± 29.7 vs. 70.9 ± 27.1, p = 0.001), mood (58.5 ± 24.9 vs. 71.0 ± 25.6, p = 0.001), and physical resistance (61.6 ± 28.4 vs. 67.8 ± 27.4, p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Considering the impact of PAP treatment on patients' psychological and HRQoL evaluations that we observed, our data are valuable for unveiling different profiles characterizing this clinical population.