Paediatric CPAP in the digital age

Anna Mulholland; Rebecca Mihai; Kirsten Ellis; Margot J Davey; Gillian M Nixon

doi:10.1016/j.sleep.2021.06.006

Paediatric CPAP in the digital age

Sleep Med. 2021 Aug:84:352-355. doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2021.06.006. Epub 2021 Jun 12.

Authors

Anna Mulholland¹, Rebecca Mihai¹, Kirsten Ellis¹, Margot J Davey², Gillian M Nixon³

Affiliations

¹ Melbourne Children's Sleep Centre, Monash Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
² Melbourne Children's Sleep Centre, Monash Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
³ Melbourne Children's Sleep Centre, Monash Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: Gillian.Nixon@monashhealth.org.

PMID: 34242925
DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2021.06.006

Abstract

Objectives: Adherence to Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) in children can be challenging. Advancements in CPAP technology have potential to influence adherence. The aim of this study was to compare adherence rates of children with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) initiated on autotitrating CPAP (APAP) with remote modem monitoring compared to a cohort started on fixed pressure CPAP alone.

Methods: Children aged over 3 years starting APAP at our centre between February 2017 and February 2020 were included. Therapy data was obtained for the initial 90 days. Data was compared to a cohort of children started on CPAP between July 2004 and September 2008.

Results: A total of 61 patients with a median age of 14.3 years formed the APAP group, and were significantly older than the CPAP group who had a median age of 8.6 years (p = 0.02). Co-morbid conditions were present in 51% compared with 69% in the earlier cohort (p = 0.11). No significant difference was found in any adherence parameters between the groups. The value closest to achieving a significant difference was hours used per day used, with an median of 5.2 h in the CPAP group compared with 7.0 h in the APAP group (p = 0.07). Two-way ANOVA including age group (above or below 13 years) showed that both age group and treatment group (CPAP vs APAP) were significantly associated with a difference in adherence (F = 4.41, p = 0.006), with mean hours used on days used being highest in the APAP group aged under 13 years. However no significant interaction was found between age and treatment group.

Conclusion: Despite the convenience for patients with outpatient initiation and ability to achieve optimal pressures quickly and remotely, our results show no improvement in adherence using APAP with remote monitoring, with the possible exception of children aged under 13 years. A large randomized controlled trial would be required to confirm these findings.

Keywords: Adherence; CPAP; Obstructive sleep apnoea; Paediatric; Remote monitoring.

MeSH terms

Adolescent
Child
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure*
Humans
Patient Compliance
Polysomnography
Sleep Apnea, Obstructive* / therapy