Cost Effectiveness of Ambulatory Management for Veterans With Sleep Apnea
NCT ID: NCT00880165
Last Updated: 2014-04-21
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
296 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2006-11-30
2010-01-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Telemedici ne Management of Veterans With Newly Diagnosed Obstructiv e Sleep Apnea (OSA)
NCT02159885
Remote Diagnosis and Management of Obstructive Sleep Apnea
NCT03007745
Impact of Positive Airway Pressure Therapy on Clinical Outcomes in Older Veterans With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Comorbid Obstructive Sleep Apnea (Overlap Syndrome)
NCT04179981
Telehealth for Sleep Apnea: Effectiveness, Implementation, and Cost in the Military Health System
NCT07121452
Remote Monitoring in Obstructive Sleep Apnea
NCT01678560
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Research Design: In this prospective randomized control trial of equivalency, participants referred to the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh VA Medical Centers for evaluation for OSA will be randomized to either exclusively in-lab or home testing following baseline assessment.
Methodology: In-lab polysomnograms will be performed to diagnose OSA and titrate the pressure setting for subsequent CPAP therapy. Self-administered home testing will consist of an overnight unattended sleep study followed by a 1-week autoCPAP titration trial. Objectively assessed CPAP adherence and its consequent effects on subjective and objective daytime sleepiness, disease specific and general functional impairment, and participant preference will be obtained at 1- and 3-months after starting CPAP treatment and 3-monthly thereafter to the end of study follow-up. Medical service use and cost will be collected for the entire observation period.
Aim 1 will determine if participants with suspected OSA who receive home testing have the same adherence to subsequent CPAP treatment and the same functional outcomes as participants receiving in-lab testing. Primary outcome measures will be 1) objectively measured adherence to CPAP treatment and 2) the global score on the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) to assess the consequent effects of adherence on disease specific functional impairment. Secondary functional outcome measures will assess subjective (Epworth Sleepiness Scale) and objective (Psychomotor Vigilance Test) daytime sleepiness, and general quality of life (SF-12). Hypothesis 1: Despite differences between in-lab versus home testing in terms of technology, time participants interact with health care professionals, and environment, there is no clinically significant decline in mean CPAP adherence and no clinically significant reduction in functional outcomes in participants receiving home versus in-lab testing.
Aim 2 will compare the differences in cost and quality-adjusted life years saved (QALYS) between home versus in-lab testing to estimate a cost-effectiveness ratio. Participant preference will be assessed with the EuroQol (EQ-5D) and Health Utilities Index 2 (HUI). Hypothesis 2a: Average total health-care delivery cost is lower for veterans receiving home testing relative to those receiving in-lab testing. Hypothesis 2b: Because we believe that at-home testing will have lower costs and equivalent outcomes, we will be 90% confident that the cost per QALY ratio comparing at-home testing with in-lab testing will be less than $100,000.
Clinical Relationship: We need to determine the most cost effective way to diagnose veterans with OSA and initiate them on CPAP treatment. If the results show that home testing produces clinical outcomes that are not significantly clinically inferior and similar or reduced costs compared with in-lab testing, decision makers can be confident that home monitors can be used to diagnose and treat OSA and that improving veterans' access to care for OSA need not require construction of additional, costly sleep labs.
Findings: We anticipate that the results of Aim 1 will demonstrate that participants receiving in-lab versus home testing have similar clinical outcomes. We further anticipate that Aim 2 will demonstrate that home testing is more cost effective than in-lab testing. If confirmed, these findings will lead to wide acceptance of home portable monitor testing and increase veteran access to care.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
DIAGNOSTIC
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Arm 1
In-laboratory testing followed by continuous positive airway pressure treatment
Continuous positive airway pressure apparatus
Veterans randomized to both arms who are diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea will be started on treatment with continuous positive airway pressure.
Arm 2
Home unattended testing followed by continuous positive airway pressure treatment
Continuous positive airway pressure apparatus
Veterans randomized to both arms who are diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea will be started on treatment with continuous positive airway pressure.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Continuous positive airway pressure apparatus
Veterans randomized to both arms who are diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea will be started on treatment with continuous positive airway pressure.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patients referred for a sleep evaluation for suspected sleep apnea.
* Age 18 years or older
* Living within 90 miles of the Sleep Center.
Exclusion Criteria
* Unable or unwilling to provide informed written consent.
* Lack of telephone access or inability to return for follow-up testing.
* A history of prior sleep evaluations, OSA treatment, or sleep disorder in addition to OSA.
* A clinically unstable chronic medical condition as defined by a new diagnosis or change in medical management in the previous 3 months of cardiac disease, thyroid disease, diabetes, depression or psychosis, cirrhosis, or recently diagnosed cancer.
* Individuals already on long term oxygen therapy or requiring bilevel positive airway pressure.
* Individuals with rotating shift work or irregular work schedules over the last 6 months.
* Suspected or confirmed to be pregnant. A pregnancy test will be performed using the urine sample obtained at the initial visit.
* Inability to complete the Assessment Battery - e.g. less than a 5th grade reading level
18 Years
90 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Pennsylvania
OTHER
US Department of Veterans Affairs
FED
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Samuel T. Kuna, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
VA Medical Center, Philadelphia
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Sunwoo B, Kuna ST. Ambulatory management of patients with sleep apnea: is there a place for portable monitor testing? Clin Chest Med. 2010 Jun;31(2):299-308. doi: 10.1016/j.ccm.2010.02.003.
Kuna ST, Gurubhagavatula I, Maislin G, Hin S, Hartwig KC, McCloskey S, Hachadoorian R, Hurley S, Gupta R, Staley B, Atwood CW. Noninferiority of functional outcome in ambulatory management of obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011 May 1;183(9):1238-44. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201011-1770OC. Epub 2011 Jan 21.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IIR 04-021
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.