Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: A dental appliance for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is recommended for patients who cannot adjust to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatments.



Objectives: To describe patients with extremely severe OSA who were successfully treated with a dental appliance and to compare their characteristics with the relevant literature to identify clinical features associated with a good outcome.



Methods: The clinical, management, and outcome data of three patients with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of > 80 who showed clinical improvement following treatment with a dental appliance were collected retrospectively from sleep laboratory reports in Israel over a period of 3 years. 



Results: The patients included one man and two women, aged 33, 56, and 61 years, respectively. The diagnosis of OSA was based on clinical examination and polysomnography. AHI values at presentation were 83, 81, and 84, respectively. Treatment with a dental appliance (Herbst® or MDSA®) was proposed due to patient noncompliance with CPAP. Follow-up polysomnography with the dental appliance revealed a reduction in the AHI to 1.7, 10.7, and 11, respectively. All patients had supine OSA and a retrognathic mandible, both of which have been found to be associated with a good prognosis for treatment with a dental appliance.



Conclusions: Dental appliances may be considered an appropriate second-choice option to treat severe OSA in patients who are noncompliant with CPAP. This study helps physicians identify patients with extremely severe OSA who are suitable for dental appliance treatment. Well-designed large-scale studies are needed to reach definitive conclusions. 

Background: Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is a sleep-related breathing disorder characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness, accidents and high medical expenses. The first line of treatment for OSAS is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP).

Objectives: To examine attitudes and beliefs as well as physiological and sociodemographic factors affecting OSA patients' decision whether or not to purchase a CPAP device.

Methods: The study was divided into two stages; in the first, 83 subjects completed self-administered questionnaires prior to sleep examination (polysomnographic study). The questionnaires related to sleep habits, sleep disorders, questions organized around health belief model (HBM) concepts, sociodemographic information, health status and PSG[1] examination. In the second stage, 3 months later, 50 OSAS patients were interviewed by telephone, which included questions about their reasons for purchasing/not purchasing the CPAP device.

Results: Only 48% of the OSAS patients purchased the CPAP device. The significant factors positively affecting the decision included higher levels of physiological factors such as body mass index (coefficient 0.36, P < 0.05) and respiratory disturbance index (coefficient 0.16, P < 0.05), higher income levels (coefficient 3.26, p < 0.05), and higher levels of knowledge about OSAS (coefficient -2.98, P < 0.1).

Conclusions: Individuals who are more aware of their own health condition, are better informed about OSAS and have higher incomes are more likely to purchase the device. We suggest reducing the level of co-payment and providing patients with more information about the severe effects of OSAS.

Background: Continuous positive airway pressure is the treatment of choice for patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

Objective: To determine the factors influencing treatment initiation with a CPAP[1] device in a healthcare system in which co-payment is required.

Methods: A total of 400 adult patients with OSAS[2] who required CPAP therapy completed questionnaires at three different stages of the diagnostic and therapeutic process: CPAP titration study (stage 1), patient adaptation trial (stage 2), and purchase of a CPAP device (stage 3). Logistic regression was used to analyze the variables influencing CPAP use at the different stages of the diagnostic and therapeutic processes.

Results: Only 32% of the patients who underwent CPAP titration study purchased a CPAP device. The number of subjects who purchased a CPAP device increased gradually as monthly income increased, 28% vs. 62% in the “very low” and “very high” income levels respectively. Reporting for the titration increased in patients with excessive daytime sleepiness and an Epworth Sleepiness Scale score above 9 (odds ratio = 1.9, P = 0.015). Higher socioeconomic status increased reporting to stage 2 (OR[3] = 1.23, P = 0.03) and CPAP purchase (stage 3, OR = 1.35, P = 0.002). Excessive daytime sleepiness increased reporting to stage 2 (OR = 2.28, P = 0.006). Respiratory disturbance index above 35 increased CPAP purchasing (OR = 2.01, P = 0.022). Support from the bed partner, referring physician and sleep laboratory team increased CPAP purchasing.

Conclusions: A supportive environment for a patient with OSAS requiring CPAP is crucial to increase initiation of CPAP treatment. Minimizing cost sharing for the CPAP device will reduce inequality and may increase CPAP treatment initiation.