New management pathways for follow-up of CPAP-treated sleep apnoea patients including digital medicine and multimodal telemonitoring.

BACKGROUND

The ever-increasing number of patients diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) and treated by long-term continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) overstretches conventional follow-up pathways. New approaches to the management of CPAP-treated patient follow-up are needed to strike a balance between remote monitoring through digital technologies and in-person patient-healthcare-professional contacts. Focusing on the reshaping of the management of care pathways of CPAP-treated patients, with a specific focus on telemonitoring platforms, we aimed to review the evidence on how digital medicine and artificial intelligence (AI) tools are facilitating patient phenotyping and triage, risk stratification and the allocation of resources between the various healthcare professionals for an optimal follow-up of CPAP-treated patients.

PHENOTYPING

OSA is a heterogeneous condition with diverse phenotypes differing in symptoms, comorbidities, demographics, lifestyle and socioeconomic context. Different phenotypes are associated with different CPAP adherence patterns and differing long-term prognosis. This diversity demands greater plurality in management pathways with different types and levels of support to ensure treatment adherence and risk reduction for patients while easing the burden on health services. In multidimensional phenotyping, we discuss alternatives to the apnoea hypopnoea index (AHI) as a measure of OSA severity. Then we consider risk stratification taking advantage of the wealth of CPAP monitoring data already available in databases that can now be exploited using AI and machine learning to direct (stratify) patients into appropriate follow-up management pathways.

INTEGRATED CARE CLINICS FOR HIGH-RISK PATIENTS: We look at the role of integrated OSA care clinics particularly for the management of high-risk patients with low adherence and progression of comorbidities. Here, multidisciplinary teams might propose comorbidity management, and the use of connected wearable devices for long-term monitoring of physical activity, along with remote CPAP monitoring.

REMOTE MANAGEMENT PATHWAYS

The pros and cons of remote management pathways to replace in-person follow-up visits are considered, including the need to re-evaluate CPAP-device reimbursement policies in some countries. While remote CPAP monitoring has become the cornerstone of follow-up providing information on adherence and efficacy, the processing of alerts needs to be improved, particularly regarding mask changes and early detection of CPAP failures.

CHALLENGES

The implementation of CPAP monitoring alone, as well as its extension to multimodal monitoring, can present challenges that remain to be addressed (eg, access to digital care). The extent and components of remote follow-up must be adapted to each specific OSA phenotype. Finally, we give examples of certain patient phenotypes (eg, comorbid insomnia with OSA) with specific follow-up requirements, for which remote (even multimodal) monitoring alone has limitations and the intervention of both sleep specialists and/or their colleagues from other disciplines is needed.

CONCLUSION

Appropriately tailored combined digital and in-person CPAP follow-up pathways would present advantages both for patients with OSA and healthcare services.