Observational studySleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2020
Evaluation of an OSA risk stratifying and treatment protocol during inpatient rehabilitation of post-stroke patients.
Observational study in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding Inpatient Sleep Studies for Sleep-Disordered Breathing: A Retrospective Population-Based Study of Health Administrative Databases.CHEST pulmonary · 2025Article
- Prevalence, incidence, and the time trends of sleep-disordered breathing among patients with stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate outcomes, outside of a clinical trial setting, of a protocol utilizing overnight oximetry (NOx) to risk stratify post-stroke patients for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) followed by autoadjusting continuous positive airway pressure (APAP) treatment in patients considered high risk for OSA.
methodsRetrospective observational study of post-stroke patients at an academic inpatient stroke rehabilitation facility. Patients underwent NOx, and those at high risk for OSA (oxygen desaturation index 3% > 10 per hour) were attempted on a trial of APAP, and further stratified into high risk adherent with treatment (HRAT) or high-risk failed treatment (HRFT). Change in functional independence measure (FIM) was used to assess recovery.
resultsTwo hundred twenty-four post-stroke patients underwent NOx, with 120 (53%) considered high risk for OSA. Twelve (10%) were compliant with APAP treatment (> 4 h/night on > 70% of nights). No difference in change in FIM scores was observed for HRAT versus HRFT [total FIM change - 5.8, 95% CI (- 13.9, 2.2); motor FIM change - 4.5, 95% CI (- 11.5, 2.4); cognitive FIM change - 1.3, 95% CI (-3.8, 1.2)]. A subgroup analysis matched 14 HRAT patients (using adherence criterion of APAP usage > 50% of nights) to 35 HRFT patients. A statistically significant, but clinically irrelevant, difference in total FIM change was observed (HRAT vs HRFT, difference between means - 5.2, p = 0.03).
conclusionsThe use of APAP in high-risk patients was poorly tolerated and did not improve post-stroke recovery. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to determine the effect of APAP treatment on short-term recovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31290082What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.