Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Continuous positive airway pressure is the treatment of choice for patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

Objective: To determine the factors influencing treatment initiation with a CPAP[1] device in a healthcare system in which co-payment is required.

Methods: A total of 400 adult patients with OSAS[2] who required CPAP therapy completed questionnaires at three different stages of the diagnostic and therapeutic process: CPAP titration study (stage 1), patient adaptation trial (stage 2), and purchase of a CPAP device (stage 3). Logistic regression was used to analyze the variables influencing CPAP use at the different stages of the diagnostic and therapeutic processes.

Results: Only 32% of the patients who underwent CPAP titration study purchased a CPAP device. The number of subjects who purchased a CPAP device increased gradually as monthly income increased, 28% vs. 62% in the “very low” and “very high” income levels respectively. Reporting for the titration increased in patients with excessive daytime sleepiness and an Epworth Sleepiness Scale score above 9 (odds ratio = 1.9, P = 0.015). Higher socioeconomic status increased reporting to stage 2 (OR[3] = 1.23, P = 0.03) and CPAP purchase (stage 3, OR = 1.35, P = 0.002). Excessive daytime sleepiness increased reporting to stage 2 (OR = 2.28, P = 0.006). Respiratory disturbance index above 35 increased CPAP purchasing (OR = 2.01, P = 0.022). Support from the bed partner, referring physician and sleep laboratory team increased CPAP purchasing.

Conclusions: A supportive environment for a patient with OSAS requiring CPAP is crucial to increase initiation of CPAP treatment. Minimizing cost sharing for the CPAP device will reduce inequality and may increase CPAP treatment initiation.

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome is a major public health hazard affecting 2–4% of the adult population; only 10% of these patients are recognized by healthcare providers. In the last decade the number of referrals for polysomnography increased threefold in Israel, compared to 12-fold worldwide, and is expected to increase even more in the coming years. This constant demand for PSG[1] studies is beyond the current capacity of sleep laboratories, thus preventing diagnosis for most patients with suspected OSAS[2]. In the current review, we examine problems facing decision-makers on how to treat the increasing flood of patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of sleep-disordered breathing. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of current technologies for OSA diagnosis, i.e., laboratory versus at-home technologies. We conclude that no current alternative exists to the use of PSG for OSA diagnosis. When at-home technologies are suggested for OSAS diagnosis, data should be provided on factors influencing its cost-effectiveness, e.g., accuracy rates of diagnosis, relative cost of human resources, and case-mix of patients tested. Since PSG remains the gold standard for diagnosis of OSAS, in Israel resources should be allocated to increasing the volume of beds for PSG studies in order to increase access to diagnosis and treatment, which in turn provides better quality of life, saves scarce resources of the healthcare system, prevents unnecessary accidents and increases workers’ productivity.