ReviewFederal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS2024
Use of Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation for Treating OSA in Military Patient Populations.
Review in Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Failure to effectively treat obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and its symptoms is incompatible with military readiness. Continuous positive airway pressure (PAP) is the gold standard treatment for OSA, but it is impractical in austere environments. Another OSA treatment, hypoglossal nerve stimulation (HGNS), which is implanted, could have advantages for military patients but is unclear whether HGNS is efficacious. Methods: We conducted a review of randomized controlled trials and controlled trials published from 2013 to 2023. Primary outcome measures included the Apnea-Hypopnea Index and Epworth Sleepiness Scale. The quality of evidence was assessed using a rating of 1 to 5 based on a modification of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence and Grades of Recommendation. Results: We identified 334 studies; 318 did not meet inclusion criteria. The remaining 16 articles were classified into 9 cohorts. Six articles were based on data from the STAR trial and 4 were based on data from a German postmarket long-term follow-up of upper airway stimulation for OSA efficacy. The remaining cohorts were smaller studies that examined moderate-to-severe OSA with nonadherence or failure, a randomized controlled crossover trial, and 1 direct comparator with PAP treatment. Conclusions: HGNS feasibility in military settings has not been adequately studied, considering the specific demands of operational settings and patient demographics. Understanding risks and benefits specific to military context will help guide practices and determine the suitability of HGNS for OSA in diverse military settings.
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.