Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a 3-year tele-messaging intervention for positive airway pressure (PAP) use in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).
Study design: A post hoc cost-effectiveness analysis (from US payers' perspective) of data from a 3-month tele-OSA trial, augmented with 33 months of epidemiologic follow-up.
Methods: Cost-effectiveness was compared among 3 groups of participants with an apnea-hypopnea index of at least 15 events/hour: (1) no messaging (n = 172), (2) messaging for 3 months (n = 124), and (3) messaging for 3 years (n = 46). We report the incremental cost (2020 US$) per incremental hour of PAP use and the fraction probability of acceptability based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1825 per year ($5/day).
Results: The use of 3 years of messaging had similar mean annual costs ($5825) compared with no messaging ($5889; P = .89) but lower mean cost compared with 3 months of messaging ($7376; P = .02). Those who received messaging for 3 years had the highest mean PAP use (4.11 hours/night), followed by no messaging (3.03 hours/night) and 3 months of messaging (2.84 hours/night) (all P < .05). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios indicated that 3 years of messaging showed lower costs and greater hours of PAP use compared with both no messaging and 3 months of messaging. Based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1825, there is a greater than 97.5% chance (ie, 95% confidence) that 3 years of messaging is acceptable compared with the other 2 interventions.
Conclusions: Long-term tele-messaging is highly likely to be cost-effective compared with both no and short-term messaging, with an acceptable willingness-to-pay threshold. Future long-term cost-effectiveness studies in a randomized controlled trial setting are warranted.