Trial reportThorax2020
Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Thorax, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03125512 (Comparing a Convenient Positional Therapy Device to CPAP for Treatment of Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea, A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Comparing a Convenient Positional Therapy Device to CPAP for Treatment of Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea, A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- European Respiratory Society guideline on non-CPAP therapies for obstructive sleep apnoea.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2021Guideline
- Prospective crossover trial of positional and CPAP therapy for the treatment of mild-to-moderate positional obstructive sleep apnea.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2025Trial
- Patient compliance and satisfaction with a new forehead device for positional obstructive sleep apnoea treatment: a post hoc analysis of a randomised controlled trial.BMJ open respiratory research · 2023Trial
- Redefining Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Treatment in the Modern Era.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2026Review
- Exploring the treatment journey of obstructive sleep apnoea: a scoping review on the perspectives of Chinese patients.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Review
- Article
- Twelve-Month CPAP Therapy Modulates BDNF Levels in Patients with Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Implications for Metabolic and Treatment Compliance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- Positional therapy: is it ready for prime time?Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2025Article
- International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2023Review
- Validation Study of Airgo, an Innovative Device to Screen Sleep Respiratory Disorders.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Making Sense of the Noise: Toward Rational Treatment for Obstructive Sleep Apnea.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2020Article
- Efficacy and long-term follow-up of positional therapy by vibrotactile neck-based device in the management of positional OSA.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesUp to 77% of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) have positional OSA (POSA) but traditional positional therapy (PT) methods have failed as they were poorly tolerated. New convenient vibratory PT devices have been invented but while recent studies suggest high treatment efficacy and adherence, there are no published data comparing these devices directly with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Our objective is to evaluate if a convenient vibratory PT device is non-inferior to CPAP in POSA treatment.
methodsIn this crossover randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients with POSA with significant daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)≥10). POSA diagnosis was based on: (1) total Apnoea/Hypopnoea Index (AHI)>10/hour and non-supine AHI<10/hour (2) supine AHI≥2 × non-supine AHI. Patients used their initial allocated devices (PT or CPAP) for 8 weeks before crossing to the alternative intervention after a 1 week washout. The primary aim is to measure changes in ESS between the two treatments. Secondary outcomes include sleep study parameters and patient treatment preference (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03125512).
results40 patients completed the trial between April 2017 and December 2018. Difference in ESS after 8 weeks of device use (PT minus CPAP) was 2.0 (95% CI 0.68 to 3.32), exceeding our predetermined non-inferiority margin of 1.5. AHI on CPAP was lower than with PT (4.0±3.2 vs 13.0±13.8 events/hour, respectively, p=0.001), although both were lower than at baseline. Time spent supine was significantly lower with PT than CPAP (p<0.001). 60% of patients preferred CPAP, 20% preferred PT, while 20% preferred neither device.
conclusionsThe non-inferiority ESS endpoint for PT compared with CPAP was not met and the results were inconclusive. Future trials with larger sample sizes or in less symptomatic patients are warranted to provide further insight into the role of these new vibratory PT devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.