Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37542679›Full record

ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2024

Patient-reported experience with hypoglossal nerve stimulation in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea.

M Braun, M Wollny, C Schoebel, J U Sommer, C Heiser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Patient Perceptions of Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation on Social Media.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
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

5 authors.

M BraunDepartment of Pneumology, University Medicine Essen - Ruhrlandklinik, West German Lung Center, University Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany. marcelbraun@mac.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8101-3465
M WollnyMedImbursement, Tarmstedt, Germany.
C SchoebelDepartment of Pneumology, University Medicine Essen - Ruhrlandklinik, West German Lung Center, University Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany.
J U SommerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
C HeiserDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreathing-synchronized hypoglossal nerve stimulation (HNS) is routinely used as an alternative treatment for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Significant and clinically relevant improvements in disease severity and OSA symptoms such as daytime sleepiness as well as overall quality of life have been reported in randomized-controlled trials and large real-world cohort studies. However, so far, few data exist on patient-reported experience with the treatment.

methodsA structured survey with 22 questions was constructed using five-level Likert scales (1 = no agreement, 5 = complete agreement) to evaluate patient experience with HNS and perception of the treatment in the domains "Overall experience with therapy," "Experience with treatment process," and "Side-effects from treatment." Additional data were collected on current symptom status, measured with Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) questionnaire, and OSA disease history. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to test associations of medical variables and response behavior. Correlations between variables and domains, as well as individual items, were assessed using Spearman rank test.

resultsA total of 75 patients from Germany who were treated with breathing-synchronized HNS were enrolled (mean age 57.3 years, 78% male), and 71 questionnaires with complete data were included for analysis. Two-thirds of participants (67%) had a history of OSA history for 5 years or longer. Of all patients, 76% had normalized OSA symptoms at time of the study (ESS: 6.4 ± 5.0) and 98% reported using stimulation therapy every night. Regression analysis revealed an association of current symptoms measured with ESS and response behavior. Hence, patients with normalized daytime sleepiness reported significantly more positive experience across all domains assessed, compared to patients with residual daytime sleepiness. Overall, only 2% of participants reported side effects that made them reduce or discontinue stimulation therapy. The rate of reported side effects was associated with current symptom control under therapy.

conclusionsOverall patient-reported experience with breathing-synchronized HNS therapy was positive and high satisfaction with the treatment process was observed. Side effects occurred, but rarely affected subjective use of the therapy or satisfaction. Subjective experience and perception are influenced by residual daytime sleepiness with stimulation therapy.

Indexed as

Disorders of Excessive SomnolenceSleep Apnea, ObstructiveFemaleHumansHypoglossal NerveMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeHypoglossal nerve stimulationPatient-centered researchPatient-reported experienceTherapy perceptionUpper airway stimulation

Identifiers

PMID37542679
PMCPMC10955022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.