Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31739856›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2019

Long-Term Objective Adherence to Mandibular Advancement Device Therapy Versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Patients With Moderate Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

Grietje E de Vries, Aarnoud Hoekema, Johannes Q P J Claessen, Cornelis Stellingsma, Boudewijn Stegenga, Huib A M Kerstjens, Peter J Wijkstra

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01588275 (Cost-effectiveness of obstRuctivE Sleep Apnea Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01588275 nacompletednot on this map

Cost-effectiveness of obstRuctivE Sleep Apnea Therapy (REST Study): Comparison of MRA Therapy Versus CPAP Therapy in Moderate OSAS

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Medical Center GroningenRan2012 to 2017Enrolled86ConditionsSleep Apnea, ObstructiveArmsmandibular repositioning appliance (MRA) (SomnoDent), Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. European Respiratory Society guideline on non-CPAP therapies for obstructive sleep apnoea.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2021
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Objective and subjective adherence to oral appliance therapy in adults with obstructive sleep apnea: pilot data from a one-year longitudinal study.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2026
    Article
  7. The role of positional changes in optimizing OSA treatment: evidence from DISE.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Evolution of adherence and self-reported symptoms over 36 months with mandibular advancement device therapy for obstructive sleep apnea: a retrospective study.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2024
    Article
  10. The role of oral appliance therapy in obstructive sleep apnoea.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2023
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Treatment usage patterns of oral appliances for obstructive sleep apnea over the first 60 days: a cluster analysis.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2021
    Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Grietje E de VriesDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Aarnoud HoekemaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Johannes Q P J ClaessenDepartment of Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery, Martini Hospital, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Cornelis StellingsmaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Boudewijn StegengaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Huib A M KerstjensDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Peter J WijkstraDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University of Groningen · NLAcademic Medical Center · NLMartini Ziekenhuis · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

objectivesComparable health effects of mandibular advancement device (MAD) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy have been attributed to higher adherence with MAD compared with CPAP therapy. The objective of this study was to make a direct comparison of the objective adherence between MAD and CPAP in patients with moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).

methodsAdherence was monitored for 12 months in 59 patients with moderate OSA (apnea-hypopnea index 15-30 events/h) as part of a randomized controlled trial. Objective adherence with MAD was assessed using the TheraMon microsensor. Objective adherence with CPAP was assessed using the built-in registration software with readout on SD card. Self-reported adherence with both therapies was assessed using a questionnaire.

resultsForty patients (68%) completed the study with the therapy to which they were randomly assigned. Median (interquartile range) objective adherence (h/night) in the 3rd month was 7.4 (5.2-8.2) for MAD and 6.8 (5.7-7.6) for CPAP (P = .41), compared to 6.9 (3.5-7.9) with MAD and 6.8 (5.2-7.6) with CPAP (P = .85) in the 12th month. There were no significant changes between the 3rd and 12th month for both MAD (P = .21) and CPAP (P = .46). Changes in adherence were not significantly different between MAD and CPAP (P = .51). Self-reported adherence was significantly higher with MAD than CPAP at all follow-ups. Self-reported adherence with CPAP was lower than objective CPAP adherence at the 6th and 12th month (P = .02).

conclusionsObjective adherence with MAD and CPAP is comparable and consistent over time. Self-reported adherence is higher with MAD than with CPAP giving rise to interesting discrepancy between objective and self-reported adherence with CPAP. CLINICAL

trial registrationRegistry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT01588275.

Indexed as

Continuous Positive Airway PressureOcclusal SplintsPatient ComplianceFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPolysomnographySleep Apnea, ObstructiveSurveys and QuestionnairesTime Factorspatient adherencerandomized controlled trialsleep apnea

Identifiers

PMID31739856
PMCPMC6853388
OpenAlexW2979314929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.