Dataset Information

Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews on the Efficacy of Oral Appliance Therapy for Adult and Pediatric Sleep-Disordered Breathing.

ABSTRACT:

Study objectives

To assess the methodological quality of published systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) about the efficacy of oral appliances (OA) in the management of adult and pediatric sleep-disordered breathing (SDB).

Methods

SRs/MAs that evaluated the efficacy of OA therapy on the treatment of SDB in human subjects of all age groups were sought. Multiple electronic databases were searched for articles published in any language from the database's inception until January 2016. Two reviewers independently selected and then assessed the methodological quality of the studies using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) measurement tool.

Results

Thirteen reviews on adult SDB were included (2 SRs and 11 SRs with MAs). Of those, seven were medium quality and six were high quality. Only four reviews were included on pediatric SDB (3 SRs and 1 SR with MA). Three of these were of high quality and one was medium quality. The identified limitations in the included reviews were failing to reference the excluded studies or describe reasons for exclusion, lack of applying valid criteria to assess the quality of included studies, lack of publication bias assessment, and absence of conflicts of interest reporting.

Conclusions

Overall, SRs/MAs on OA therapy for adult and pediatric SDB were conducted with acceptable methodological quality. High AMSTAR scores should not be extrapolated as a proxy of the methodological quality of the included evidence. There is a need for more primary studies and then that information can be used to be synthesized through SRs on pediatric SDB.

SUBMITTER: Al-Jewair TS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4957196 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews on the Efficacy of Oral Appliance Therapy for Adult and Pediatric Sleep-Disordered Breathing.

Al-Jewair Thikriat S TS Gaffar Balgis O BO Flores-Mir Carlos C

Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine 20160815 8

<h4>Study objectives</h4>To assess the methodological quality of published systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) about the efficacy of oral appliances (OA) in the management of adult and pediatric sleep-disordered breathing (SDB).<h4>Methods</h4>SRs/MAs that evaluated the efficacy of OA therapy on the treatment of SDB in human subjects of all age groups were sought. Multiple electronic databases were searched for articles published in any language from the database's inception until J ...[more]

PMID: 27397656

Similar Datasets

Project description:Between 1982 and 2006, there were 89 distinct publications dealing with oral appliance therapy involving a total of 3,027 patients, which reported results of sleep studies performed with and without the appliance. These studies, which constitute a very heterogeneous group in terms of methodology and patient population, are reviewed and the results summarized. This review focused on the following outcomes: sleep apnea (i.e. reduction in the apnea/hypopnea index or respiratory disturbance index), ability of oral appliances to reduce snoring, effect of oral appliances on daytime function, comparison of oral appliances with other treatments (continuous positive airway pressure and surgery), side effects, dental changes (overbite and overjet), and long-term compliance. We found that the success rate, defined as the ability of the oral appliances to reduce apnea/hypopnea index to less than 10, is 54%. The response rate, defined as at least 50% reduction in the initial apnea/hypopnea index (although it still remained above 10), is 21%. When only the results of randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled studies are considered, the success and response rates are 50% and 14%, respectively. Snoring was reduced by 45%. In the studies comparing oral appliances to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or to uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), an appliance reduced initial AHI by 42%, CPAP reduced it by 75%, and UPPP by 30%. The majority of patients prefer using oral appliance than CPAP. Use of oral appliances improves daytime function somewhat; the Epworth sleepiness score (ESS) dropped from 11.2 to 7.8 in 854 patients. A summary of the follow-up compliance data shows that at 30 months, 56-68% of patients continue to use oral appliance. Side effects are relatively minor but frequent. The most common ones are excessive salivation and teeth discomfort. Efficacy and side effects depend on the type of appliance, degree of protrusion, vertical opening, and other settings. We conclude that oral appliances, although not as effective as CPAP in reducing sleep apnea, snoring, and improving daytime function, have a definite role in the treatment of snoring and sleep apnea.

Project description:Study objectivesObstructive sleep apnea is associated with neurobehavioral dysfunction, but the relationship between disease severity as measured by the apnea-hypopnea index and neurobehavioral morbidity is unclear. The objective of our study is to compare the neurobehavioral morbidity of mild sleep-disordered breathing versus obstructive sleep apnea.MethodsChildren 3-12 years old recruited for mild sleep-disordered breathing (snoring with obstructive apnea-hypopnea index < 3) into the Pediatric Adenotonsillectomy Trial for Snoring were compared to children 5-9 years old recruited for obstructive sleep apnea (obstructive apnea-hypopnea 2-30) into the Childhood Adenotonsillectomy Trial. Baseline demographic, polysomnographic, and neurobehavioral outcomes were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis.ResultsThe sample included 453 participants with obstructive sleep apnea (median obstructive apnea-hypopnea index 5.7) and 459 participants with mild sleep-disordered breathing (median obstructive apnea-hypopnea index 0.5). By polysomnography, participants with obstructive sleep apnea had poorer sleep efficiency and more arousals. Children with mild sleep-disordered breathing had more abnormal executive function scores (adjusted odds ratio 1.96, 95% CI 1.30-2.94) compared to children with obstructive sleep apnea. There were also elevated Conners scores for inattention (adjusted odds ratio 3.16, CI 1.98-5.02) and hyperactivity (adjusted odds ratio 2.82, CI 1.83-4.34) in children recruited for mild sleep-disordered breathing.ConclusionsAbnormal executive function, inattention, and hyperactivity were more common in symptomatic children recruited into a trial for mild sleep-disordered breathing compared to children recruited into a trial for obstructive sleep apnea. Young, snoring children with only minimally elevated apnea-hypopnea levels may still be at risk for deficits in executive function and attention.Trial registrationPediatric Adenotonsillectomy for Snoring (PATS), NCT02562040; Childhood Adenotonsillectomy Trial (CHAT), NCT00560859.

Project description:Key points•Some patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) respond well to oral appliance therapy, whereas others do not for reasons that are unclear. •In the present study, we used gold-standard measurements to demonstrate that patients with a posteriorly-located tongue (natural sleep endoscopy) exhibit a preferential improvement in collapsibility (lowered critical closing pressure) with oral appliances. •We also show that patients with both posteriorly-located tongue and less severe collapsibility (predicted responder phenotype) exhibit greater improvements in severity of obstructive sleep apnoea (i.e. reduction in event frequency by 83%, in contrast to 48% in predicted non-responders). •The present study suggests that the structure and severity of pharyngeal obstruction determine the phenotype of sleep apnoea patients who benefit maximally from oral appliance efficacy.AbstractA major limitation to the administration of oral appliance therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is that therapeutic responses remain unpredictable. In the present study, we tested the hypotheses that oral appliance therapy (i) reduces pharyngeal collapsibility preferentially in patients with posteriorly-located tongue and (ii) is most efficacious (reduction in apnoea-hypopnea index; AHI) in patients with a posteriorly-located tongue and less-severe baseline pharyngeal collapsibility. Twenty-five OSA patients underwent upper airway endoscopy during natural sleep to assess tongue position (type I: vallecula entirely visible; type II: vallecula obscured; type III: vallecula and glottis obscured), as well as obstruction as a result of other pharyngeal structures (e.g. epiglottis). Additional sleep studies with and without oral appliance were performed to measure collapsibility (critical closing pressure; Pcrit) and assess treatment efficacy. Overall, oral appliance therapy reduced Pcrit by 3.9 ± 2.4 cmH2 O (mean ± SD) and AHI by 69 ± 19%. Therapy lowered Pcrit by an additional 2.7 ± 0.9 cmH2 O in patients with posteriorly-located tongue (types II and III) compared to those without (type I) (P < 0.008). Posteriorly-located tongue (p = 0.03) and lower collapsibility (p = 0.04) at baseline were significant determinants of (greater-than-average) treatment efficacy. Predicted responders (type II and III and Pcrit < 1 cmH2 O) exhibited a greater reduction in the AHI (83 ± 9 vs. 48 ± 8% baseline, P < 0.001) and a lower treatment AHI (9 ± 6 vs. 32 ± 15 events h-1 , P < 0.001) than predicted non-responders. The site and severity of pharyngeal collapse combine to determine oral appliance efficacy. Specifically, patients with a posteriorly-located tongue plus less-severe collapsibility are the strongest candidates for oral appliance therapy.

Dataset Information

Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews on the Efficacy of Oral Appliance Therapy for Adult and Pediatric Sleep-Disordered Breathing.

Study objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews on the Efficacy of Oral Appliance Therapy for Adult and Pediatric Sleep-Disordered Breathing.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets