Abstract
Abstract Background Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a significant public health problem with large health and economic burden. Despite the existence of effective treatment, undiagnosed OSA remains a challenge. The gold standard diagnostic tool is polysomnography (PSG), yet this test is expensive, labour intensive, and time-consuming. Home-based, limited channel sleep study testing (Level 3 and 4) can advance and widen access to diagnostic services. This systematic review aims to summarise available evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of limited channel tests compared to laboratory and home PSG in diagnosing OSA. Method Eligible studies were identified across the following databases: MEDLINE, Psychinfo, Proquest, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane, Emcare and Web of Science. Studies were screened, critically appraised and eligible data were extracted using a standardised template. Relevant findings were summarised using a qualitative approach adhering to economic reporting standards. Results 915 non-duplicate abstracts were identified, 82 full-text articles were retrieved for review. 32 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis: 28 studies investigated Level 3 and four assessed Level 4 OSA diagnostic tests. Using a dominance ranking framework to compare cost and outcomes, both Level 3 and Level 4 OSA diagnostic tests were cost-effective compared to PSG. Discussion Although study designs and methodologies differ broadly, findings indicate that using limited channel diagnostic sleep tests for OSA is associated with lower cost and non-inferior health outcomes relative to PSG. Limited channel tests also resulted in shorter waiting times and improvements in access to diagnostic services for patients with OSA.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.