Moro Marilyn, Westover M Brandon, Kelly Jessica, Bianchi Matt T
Neurology Department, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Division of Sleep Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
J Clin Sleep Med. 2016 Mar;12(3):409-18. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.5596.
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and treatment with positive airway pressure (PAP) is cost-effective. However, the optimal diagnostic strategy remains a subject of debate. Prior modeling studies have not consistently supported the widely held assumption that home sleep testing (HST) is cost-effective.
We modeled four strategies: (1) treat no one; (2) treat everyone empirically; (3) treat those testing positive during in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG) via in-laboratory titration; and (4) treat those testing positive during HST with auto-PAP. The population was assumed to lack independent reasons for in-laboratory PSG (such as insomnia, periodic limb movements in sleep, complex apnea). We considered the third-party payer perspective, via both standard (quality-adjusted) and pure cost methods.
The preferred strategy depended on three key factors: pretest probability of OSA, cost of untreated OSA, and time horizon. At low prevalence and low cost of untreated OSA, the treat no one strategy was favored, whereas empiric treatment was favored for high prevalence and high cost of untreated OSA. In-laboratory backup for failures in the at-home strategy increased the preference for the at-home strategy. Without laboratory backup in the at-home arm, the in-laboratory strategy was increasingly preferred at longer time horizons.
Using a model framework that captures a broad range of clinical possibilities, the optimal diagnostic approach to uncomplicated OSA depends on pretest probability, cost of untreated OSA, and time horizon. Estimating each of these critical factors remains a challenge warranting further investigation.
阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)与发病率和死亡率增加相关,气道正压通气(PAP)治疗具有成本效益。然而,最佳诊断策略仍是一个有争议的话题。先前的建模研究并未始终支持广泛持有的家庭睡眠测试(HST)具有成本效益这一假设。
我们对四种策略进行了建模:(1)不治疗任何人;(2)对所有人进行经验性治疗;(3)通过实验室滴定法治疗在实验室多导睡眠图(PSG)检查中呈阳性的患者;(4)对在HST中呈阳性的患者使用自动PAP进行治疗。假设该人群没有进行实验室PSG检查的独立原因(如失眠、睡眠期周期性肢体运动、复杂性呼吸暂停)。我们通过标准(质量调整)和纯成本方法考虑了第三方支付方的观点。
首选策略取决于三个关键因素:OSA的预测试概率、未治疗的OSA的成本以及时间范围。在低患病率和未治疗的OSA低成本情况下,不治疗任何人的策略更受青睐,而对于高患病率和未治疗的OSA高成本情况,经验性治疗更受青睐。在家中策略失败时的实验室备用措施增加了对在家中策略的偏好。如果在家中环节没有实验室备用措施,在较长时间范围内,实验室策略越来越受青睐。
使用一个涵盖广泛临床可能性的模型框架,对于单纯性OSA的最佳诊断方法取决于预测试概率、未治疗的OSA的成本以及时间范围。估计这些关键因素中的每一个仍然是一项具有挑战性的任务,值得进一步研究。