ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Switch of Nocturnal Non-Invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation (NPPV) in Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA).
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Pregnancy and its Impact on Maternal-Fetal Health: A Hidden Threat - Narrative Review.The open respiratory medicine journal · 2025Review
- Clinical Evaluation and Management of Overlap Syndrome (OS) and Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome (OHS).Clocks & sleep · 2022Article
- Pediatric Sleep-Disordered Breathing and Long-Term Complications: Clinical and Health Implications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is considered the first-line treatment for patients with OSA, but Bilevel-PAP (BiPAP) therapy is a recognized option for noncompliant/unresponsive patients to CPAP. The present study was designed to evaluate the role of ResMed VAuto in the management of two different issues raised because of the Philips recall: the treatment of naïve noncompliant/unresponsive patients to CPAP (Group A) and the switch to VAuto for patients already on treatment with Philips Auto-BiPAP (Group B). Methods. Sixty-four patients who required auto-BiPAP treatment from August to December 2021 were included in the study. The efficacy of each mode of PAP therapy was compared between the two groups of patients. Results. Group A showed a statistically significant improvement in the apnea−hypopnea index (AHI) (7.4 ± 8.5 events·h−1 vs. 15.2 ± 12.1 events·h−1, p < 0.001), and oxygen desaturation index (ODI) (9.4 ± 8.9 events·h−1 vs. 15.2 ± 8.8 events·h−1, p = 0.029) during VAuto in comparison to CPAP, respectively. Conversely, a similar trend was found for patients in Group B for global AHI, but a statistically significant reduction was just found in supine AHI and ODI. In group B, an AHI <5 events·h−1 was found in 89.3% during VAuto in comparison to 82.1% with Philips Auto-BiPAP (p = ns). The levels of IPAPmax and EPAPmin were not statistically different between the two devices (p = 0.69 and p = 0.36, respectively). Conclusion. Bilevel ventilation in VAuto mode is effective in the clinical management of two different issues derived from the Philips recall. The switching between two different auto-BiPAP devices can be performed easily and successfully.
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.