0
Articles |

A Crossover Study Comparing the Efficacy of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure With Anterior Mandibular Positioning Devices on Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea FREE TO VIEW

Glenn T. Clark; Israel Blumenfeld; Naama Yoffe; Eli Peled; Peretz Lavie
Author and Funding Information

Affiliations: From the Department of Diagnostic Sciences and Orofacial Pain, School of Dentistry, University of California, Los Angeles,  From the Rambam Medical Center, Maxillo-Facial Surgery Department, Technion Medical School, Haifa, Israel,  From the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Sleep Laboratory, Haifa, Israel

Affiliations: From the Department of Diagnostic Sciences and Orofacial Pain, School of Dentistry, University of California, Los Angeles,  From the Rambam Medical Center, Maxillo-Facial Surgery Department, Technion Medical School, Haifa, Israel,  From the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Sleep Laboratory, Haifa, Israel

Affiliations: From the Department of Diagnostic Sciences and Orofacial Pain, School of Dentistry, University of California, Los Angeles,  From the Rambam Medical Center, Maxillo-Facial Surgery Department, Technion Medical School, Haifa, Israel,  From the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Sleep Laboratory, Haifa, Israel


1996 BY THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CHEST PHYSICIANS


Chest. 1996;109(6):1477-1483. doi:10.1378/chest.109.6.1477
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Abstract

Objective: This study compared the efficacy of a removable anterior mandibular positioning (AMP) device to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) using a fully balanced crossover design.

Design: Twenty-three male subjects with confirmed OSA were recruited from the Technion Sleep Laboratory in Haifa, Israel, from February 18, 1991 to December 17, 1992. Twenty-one of the 23 subjects enrolled completed all aspects of the study.

Results: The mean apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) before treatment was 33.86±14.30. The mean AHI decreased with CPAP to 59.50%, but decreased only 38.91% with the AMP device. The lowest mean recorded oxygen saturation level for the 21 subjects was 84.30 before treatment, 91.10 after CPAP treatment, and 90.20 after AMP treatment. Sleep data revealed a significant decrease in stage 1 and 2 (p=0.0088) and an increase in rapid eye movement percent (p=0.0066) for both treatments when compared with baseline. Three-to 10-month posttreatment phone interviews showed that 1 subject was not using either device, 1 subject was using CPAP, and 2 subjects were using the AMP device intermittently due to occasional temporomandibular joint pain symptoms. The remaining 17 subjects were all using the AMP device nightly. The symptoms of excessive daytime sleepiness also decreased significantly by both AMP and CPAP.

Conclusions: The AMP device achieved substantial success in most cases, but was less effective than CPAP, especially for the more severe cases. In general, the AMP device was strongly preferred over the CPAP by the subjects of this study.


Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
Guidelines
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543