Suppr超能文献

阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者接受持续气道正压通气治疗的健康偏好措施:一项随机试验的数据。

Health Preference Measures in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome Undergoing Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Therapy: Data from a Randomized Trial.

机构信息

Department of Respiratory Medicine, Sleep Disorders Center, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Department of Respiratory Medicine, Sleep Disorders Center, Cantonal Hospital Chur, Chur, Switzerland.

出版信息

Respiration. 2021;100(4):328-338. doi: 10.1159/000513306. Epub 2021 Feb 4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS), the preference-based, health-related quality of life in terms of utility has not been extensively studied.

OBJECTIVE

To address this point, we compared the performance of different instruments assessing utility in patients with OSAS undergoing continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of 208 patients with OSAS (28 women, mean ± SE age 54.4 ± 0.7 years, apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) 51.9 ± 1.8/h, Epworth sleepiness score 13.4 ± 0.2) participating in a randomized trial of different CPAP modalities over 2 years were analyzed. Evaluations included sleep studies, Epworth sleepiness scale, and several utility instruments that measure subjective health preference on a scale ranging from 1 (most preferred and perfect health) to 0 (least preferred and very poor health).

RESULTS

After 2 years of CPAP therapy, the mean ± SE AHI was 6.7 ± 1.5/h and Epworth score 7.9 ± 0.4, both p < 0.001 versus baseline. Baseline utilities and changes (95% confidence interval) after 2 years of CPAP therapy were EuroQol 5-dimensions 0.79 ± 0.01, 0.02 (0.00-0.05, p = 0.064); short-form 6-dimension medical outcome questionnaire 0.72 ± 0.01, 0.06 (0.04-0.08, p < 0.001); Euro-thermometer visual analog scale 0.70 ± 0.01, 0.09 (0.07-0.12, p < 0.001); time trade-off 0.82 ± 0.01, 0.03 (0.01-0.06, p = 0.002); and standard gamble 0.82 ± 0.01, -0.01 (-0.03 to 0.02, p = 0.712).

CONCLUSION

The short-form 6-dimensions questionnaire, the Euro-thermometer, and the time trade-off instruments reflected the major clinical improvements in OSAS, while the EuroQoL 5-dimensions and standard gamble tests were not sensitive to CPAP effects. These results indicate that the evaluation of utility of a treatment for OSAS depends critically on the instrument used, which is important from an individual and societal perspective.

摘要

背景

在阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征(OSAS)患者中,基于偏好的健康相关生活质量(效用)尚未得到广泛研究。

目的

为了解决这一问题,我们比较了评估接受持续气道正压通气(CPAP)治疗的 OSAS 患者效用的不同工具的性能。

材料和方法

对 208 名 OSAS 患者(28 名女性,平均年龄 54.4 ± 0.7 岁,呼吸暂停低通气指数(AHI)51.9 ± 1.8/h,Epworth 嗜睡量表 13.4 ± 0.2)的数据进行了分析,这些患者参加了一项为期 2 年的不同 CPAP 方式的随机试验。评估包括睡眠研究、Epworth 嗜睡量表和几种效用工具,这些工具通过 1(最偏好和完美健康)到 0(最不偏好和非常差健康)的量表来衡量主观健康偏好。

结果

经过 2 年 CPAP 治疗后,平均 SE AHI 为 6.7 ± 1.5/h,Epworth 评分 7.9 ± 0.4,均较基线水平显著降低(p < 0.001)。基线效用值和 2 年 CPAP 治疗后的变化(95%置信区间)为:EuroQol 5 维度 0.79 ± 0.01,0.02(0.00-0.05,p = 0.064);简短 6 维度健康调查问卷 0.72 ± 0.01,0.06(0.04-0.08,p < 0.001);Euro-thermometer 视觉模拟量表 0.70 ± 0.01,0.09(0.07-0.12,p < 0.001);时间权衡 0.82 ± 0.01,0.03(0.01-0.06,p = 0.002);标准赌博 0.82 ± 0.01,-0.01(-0.03 至 0.02,p = 0.712)。

结论

简短 6 维度问卷、Euro-thermometer 和时间权衡工具反映了 OSAS 的主要临床改善,而 EuroQoL 5 维度和标准赌博测试对 CPAP 效果不敏感。这些结果表明,对 OSAS 治疗的效用评估取决于所使用的工具,这从个体和社会角度来看都非常重要。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

4

本文引用的文献

1
Overview of Cost-effectiveness Analysis.成本效益分析概述。
JAMA. 2019 Apr 9;321(14):1400-1401. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.1265.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验