Continuous positive airway pressure compared with oral devices or lifestyle changes for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea: a review of the clinical and cost-effectiveness
CADTH
Record ID 32016000158
English
Authors' recommendations:
In general, results from the controlled setting of RCTs and systematic reviews of RCTs found that CPAP lead to better efficacy than oral devices. This benefit may be offset by patient's higher compliance to oral devices which may result in similar real-life clinical effectiveness. CPAP may be more costly than oral devices or lifestyle advice, and oral devices may be a more cost-effective option in patients who are unable to adhere to CPAP. The small number of trials included in the report, the significant heterogeneity between the included trials for many outcomes, the difference in length of follow-up periods, and the potential difference in costs, treatment effect and adherence of various types of oral appliances caution the interpretation of the results.
Details
Project Status:
Completed
Year Published:
2014
URL for published report:
http://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/htis/jan-2015/RC0619%20CPAP%20Final.pdf
English language abstract:
An English language summary is available
Publication Type:
Not Assigned
Country:
Canada
MeSH Terms
- Airway Resistance
- Continuous Positive Airway Pressure
- Sleep Apnea Syndromes
Contact
Organisation Name:
Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health
Contact Address:
600-865 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON K1S 5S8 Canada. Tel: +1 613 226 2553; Fax: +1 613 226 5392;
Contact Name:
requests@cadth.ca
Contact Email:
requests@cadth.ca
Copyright:
Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.