Successful Virtual CPAP Set up in Obstructive Sleep Apnoea: A positive innovation during the pandemic

Abstract

BackgroundTraditionally continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) trials for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) are through face to face (F2F) set up. During Covid-19 pandemic CPAP was classed as aerosol-generating hence Leeds sleep service moved to a virtual service. Patients received equipment by post followed by virtual reviews (VR). We evaluated the adherence and symptomatic benefit of postal compared to F2F method. MethodsObservational data were collected from databases monitoring CPAP loans. F2F patients met a sleep technician for hands on setup in 2019, and in 2020 postal patients received equipment, written guides, and links to custom made YouTube videos. All (F2F and postal) patients had a telephone and VR appointment to discuss symptoms, and CPAP machine (AirSense 10, ResMed Inc., San Diego, USA) data including data on usage and treatment apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI). Data was analysed using unpaired T-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and chi-square tests to examine differences in means, medians, and proportions, respectively of the F2F and postal groups. ResultsBoth groups (n = 1,221, 656 F2F, 53.7%) were similar in all categories except length of CPAP trial (postal 33 vs F2F 84 days,p < 0.0001), change in AHI (postal 22.4/Hr vs F2F 25.1/Hr,p = 0.04), and trial average use (postal 4.9 vs F2F 5.2 h,p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients continuing with CPAP (postal 64%, F2F 66%, p = 0.71), the improvement in Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS) (postal 6.9/24, F2F 7.1/24, p = 0.31) or the patient's subjective rating on whether they felt much better, better, the same or worse on CPAP (p = 0.27). Logistic regression showed factors which affected odds ratios of continuing CPAP were diagnostic AHI, treatment AHI, treatment ESS and how they felt on CPAP. Trial type did not affect the odds ratios of continuing CPAP. ConclusionsPostal CPAP trial patients had similar odds of continuing CPAP therapy compared to patients with F2F trials and achieved similar levels of ESS improvement and reporting feeling better on CPAP. This provides support for postal trials as a viable option post-pandemic.