The aim of this study was to determine the neurocognitive and neuropsychiatric effects of continuous positive airway pressure treatment on patients with obstructive sleep apnea. This cross‐sectional, prospective, observational study included 126 patients with sleep apnea. The following tests were performed: the Montreal Cognitive Assessment for the evaluation of cognitive impairment, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory, together with the Epworth Sleepiness Scale for the evaluation of neuropsychiatric symptoms and a person's general level of daytime sleepiness. The first measurement did not show neurocognitive impairment or a higher level of depressive and anxiety symptoms in 126 patients with obstructive sleep apnea in comparison to normative standards. After the 3‐month treatment indicated for 43 patients with obstructive sleep apnea, we did not find any significant improvement in cognitive performance (p = .213). However, patients with sleep apnea with continuous positive airway pressure treatment did show significantly less daytime sleepiness, anxiety and depressive symptoms (all p < .001). In conclusion, short‐term (3 months) treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea can substantially alleviate their daytime sleepiness, as well as depressive and anxiety symptoms.
General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?
Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common disorder in Type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients further increasing their already high cardiovascular risk. As T2D patients typically not report OSA symptoms, systematic screening for OSA in this population is warranted. We aimed to determine the readiness of T2D patients to undergo screening and to compare their adherence to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy with “regular” sleep clinic patients who typically seek medical advice on their own initiative. We therefore recruited 494 consecutive T2D patients and offered them OSA screening using home sleep monitoring (type IV device). All participants in high risk of moderate-to-severe OSA were recommended home sleep apnea testing (HSAT) followed by CPAP therapy. Patients were followed-up for 12 months and outcomes compared to 228 consecutive sleep clinic patients undergoing HSAT. Among 307 screened T2D patients, 94 (31%) were identified at high risk of moderate-to-severe OSA. Subsequently, 54 patients underwent HSAT, 51 were recommended, and 38 patients initiated CPAP (acceptance 75%). Among 228 sleep clinic patients, 92 (40%) were recommended and 74 patients initiated CPAP (acceptance 80%). After 1 year, 15 (39%) T2D and 29 (39%) sleep clinic patients showed good CPAP adherence (use ≥ 4 h/night ≥ 70% nights). In conclusion, 20 T2D patients needed to be screened in order to obtain one successfully treated patient. OSA screening in T2D patients identified 31% with moderate-to-severe OSA. Once diagnosed, their CPAP acceptance and adherence did not differ from sleep clinic patients. However, the reasons for the high dropout during the screening-diagnostic process impacting the overall success of the screening program need to be identified and addressed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.