4.2 Article

Factors Affecting CPAP Acceptance in Elderly Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Taiwan

Journal

RESPIRATORY CARE
Volume 58, Issue 9, Pages 1504-1513

Publisher

DAEDALUS ENTERPRISES INC
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.02176

Keywords

elderly; obstructive sleep apnea; OSA; CPAP; adherence; acceptance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) increases with age. Treatment often includes CPAP. CPAP adherence is correlated with disease severity and symptoms. We hypothesized that CPAP acceptance rates in elderly patients with OSA would be lower than in younger patients with OSA, and examined factors associated with CPAP acceptance. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 315 subjects with OSA (apnea-hypopnea index >= 5 events/h) who were treated at our hospital from 2008 to 2011 with CPAP therapy. All underwent CPAP titration testing before CPAP prescription. Subjects were grouped by age: young (25-40 y, n = 35), middle-age (41-65 y, n = 169), and elderly (> 65 y, n = 111). Demographic variables, excessive daytime sleepiness, overnight polysomnography study variables, CPAP acceptance, and CPAP adherence were compared. Regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with acceptance. RESULTS: The elderly subjects had less excessive daytime sleepiness and less pronounced alterations in overnight polysomnography variables than the subjects in the other groups, but had more cardiovascular comorbidities. The CPAP acceptance rate (overall 125/315, 39.7%) was significantly lower in the elderly group, compared with the younger group (31.5% vs 60%, P = .01). CPAP acceptance was associated with fewer comorbidities, higher excessive daytime sleepiness, and higher apnea-hypopnea index, but not age. CPAP adherence was not associated with age. CONCLUSIONS: CPAP acceptance is low in elderly patients in Taiwan. CPAP acceptance, instead of CPAP adherence, is the critical issue with elderly patients with OSA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available