4.2 Article

International Consensus Document on Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Journal

ARCHIVOS DE BRONCONEUMOLOGIA
Volume 58, Issue 1, Pages 52-68

Publisher

ELSEVIER ESPANA SLU
DOI: 10.1016/j.arbres.2021.03.017

Keywords

Obstructive sleep apnea; Diagnosis; Treatment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this international consensus document is to provide guidelines for healthcare professionals in the care of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea based on a critical analysis of the latest literature. The document was developed by an expert working group consisting of scientific societies, specialists, and a methodology expert, and includes systematic literature searches for each section. The document does not cover pediatric patients or the management of patients receiving chronic non-invasive mechanical ventilation.
The main aim of this international consensus document on obstructive sleep apnea is to provide guidelines based on a critical analysis of the latest literature to help health professionals make the best decisions in the care of adult patients with this disease. The expert working group was formed primarily of 17 scientific societies and 56 specialists from a wide geographical area (including the participation of 4 international societies), an expert in methodology, and a document a list from the Iberoamerican Cochrane Center. The document consists of a main section containing the most significant innovations and a series of online manuscripts that report the systematic literature searches performed for each section of the international consensus document. This document does not discuss pediatric patients or the management of patients receiving chronic non-invasive mechanical ventilation (these topics will be addressed in separate consensus documents). (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. on behalf of SEPAR. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

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