Skip to content

Comparing Auto-adjustable Positive Airway Pressure to Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Children With Sleep Apnea

Efficacy of Auto-adjustable Positive Airway Pressure (APAP) in Pediatric Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA).

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01846988
Enrollment
15
Registered
2013-05-06
Start date
2012-10-31
Completion date
2019-09-01
Last updated
2021-04-23

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Keywords

Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Pediatric Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Auto PAP, Auto-adjustable Positive Airway Pressure, APAP, CPAP

Brief summary

The purpose of this research study is to determine if auto-adjustable positive airway pressure (APAP) is an effective way to treat obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in children. APAP is a device similar to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) that delivers pressure to the upper airway (nose and throat) to keep the airway from collapsing while during sleep. The difference is that APAP adjusts the pressure throughout the night with changes in resistance during breathing, and CPAP gives the same amount of pressure the whole time it is worn. APAP is currently widely used to treat adults with OSA, however, this device has not yet been extensively studied in children. There are two parts to this research study. Subjects will begin using APAP at the time of enrollment for 4 to 8 weeks. The investigators will compare the pressure measured by the APAP device over the 4-8 weeks with the pressure determined by a CPAP titration study. The titration study is a second overnight sleep study that is routinely ordered when a child with sleep apnea starts treatment with CPAP. It tells the doctor what CPAP setting should be used. In the second part of this study The investigators will compare the effects of APAP with CPAP to see what is reported as more comfortable and is used during more hours of sleep. This part of the study will last about 8 weeks and each subject will use both CPAP and APAP for 4 weeks each. Currently when someone is diagnosed with OSA there is a delay in starting treatment with CPAP until the results of the titration study are available. In this research, patients could be allowed to immediately start treatment with APAP. If APAP is found to be as safe and effective as regular CPAP, treatment with APAP could be used as an alternative to CPAP.

Detailed description

This is a small clinical trial to test the feasibility of using APAP in children with sleep apnea. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is commonly used to treat OSA by delivering a predetermined amount of positive pressure to the patient's upper airway in order to reduce the collapsibility of airway structures during sleep. The commonly accepted method for determining the appropriate pressure setting for children with OSA is through an in-hospital overnight CPAP titration study. Another commonly used treatment modality in adults with OSA is auto-adjustable positive airway pressure (APAP), in which airway patency is maintained by adjusting pressure delivery through the night depending on the needs of the patient as determined by the device. Benefits of APAP compared with CPAP include the ability to initiate therapy without an inpatient CPAP titration study, resulting in more prompt establishment of treatment and cost-savings. Patient adherence may also be significantly improved as the pressure delivered is appropriate for sleep stage and patient position, resulting in greater patient comfort. Utility and efficacy of APAP compared to CPAP have never been evaluated in the pediatric population. The aim of this study is to establish APAP as an effective means of assessing CPAP pressure for OSA in children, and to determine if APAP therapy confers better treatment adherence and quality of life compared to traditional CPAP. The investigators hypothesize that APAP can effectively approximate the pressure determined by CPAP titration study, that APAP is superior to fixed CPAP in terms of treatment success, and that adherence to therapy will be improved with APAP compared to CPAP. Forty patients aged 5-20 years will be enrolled in the study. These subjects will be recruited from the pediatric pulmonary or pediatric sleep clinic at Cincinnati Children's Hospital. Patients who are suspected of having OSA will be referred in the usual manner to the sleep center for diagnostic sleep study (PSG). Following the establishment of OSA diagnosis and subsequent enrollment in the study, the subject will begin therapy with APAP which will continue for 4 to 8 weeks. In that period of time the clinically ordered in-hospital CPAP titration study will be completed. The subject will then be randomized to either traditional fixed pressure CPAP at the pressure determined by in-hospital titration or APAP. The subject will receive 4 weeks of treatment in the randomized group (CPAP or APAP) then crossover to 4 weeks in the alternate group (CPAP or APAP). Both patient and researcher will be blinded to the randomization of pressure modality. The total study period will range from 12-16 weeks.

Interventions

DEVICEcrossover treatment (REMstar Auto A-Flex)

All subjects will use same device with 4 week crossover of settings of APAP and CPAP

Sponsors

Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
5 Years to 20 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* 5 to 20 years of age * apnea hypopnea index (AHI) of ≥5 or obstructive hypoventilation

Exclusion criteria

* significant cranio-facial abnormalities * chromosomal abnormalities that would affect compliance * cerebral palsy * significant neurological disease or neuromuscular disease

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Difference Between Optimal Pressure (cm H2O) Derived From APAP run-in Period Versus Result of CPAP Titration StudyFirst visit after APAP run-in at 6-8 weeksThe aim of this study is to establish APAP as an effective treatment modality for OSAS in the pediatric population. We hypothesize that APAP can effectively approximate the pressure determined by PSG CPAP titration as measured by the average 90th pressure percentile and average CPAP pressure delivered to the patient. The in-lab CPAP titration PSG following initial diagnosis of OSA is the current standard of therapy. APAP would potentially bridge the gap between the time of diagnosis and the follow up PSG for CPAP titration, allowing for more prompt intervention.
Adherence Comparison of APAP vs.CPAP (% Days Device Used and % Days Device Used >4 Hours)end of study visit at 12-16 weeksRandomized crossover period comparison of adherence between APAP and CPAP calculated from therapy usage hours.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Michigan Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire12-16 weeksComparison of Michigan pediatric sleep questionnaire score between baseline (at time of enrollment in the study) and each group (APAP, CPAP) after randomization period for the 10 subjects who completed the study. The scale range is from 0 to 1, Normal \<0.33, at risk is 0.33-0.55 and \>0.55 abnormal.
Epworth Sleepiness Scale Questionnaire12-16 weeksComparison of Epworth Sleepiness scale questionnaire score between baseline (at time of enrollment in the study) and each group (APAP, CPAP) after randomization period for the 10 subjects who completed the study. The scale range is from 0 to 24, with a value of 10 or greater suggesting significance for sleep disordered breathing.
Comparison of Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Questionnaire Score Between Baseline and Each Randomization Period12-16 weeksComparison of Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory questionnaire score between baseline (at time of enrollment in the study) and each group (APAP, CPAP) after randomization period for the 10 subjects who completed the study. The scale scores range between 0-100. Higher scores indicate better health related quality of life. Healthy: 81.34-100, at risk: 81.33-65.4, unhealthy \<65.4

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

15 subjects started study procedures. 5 subjects withdrew after completing the APAP pressurized comparison phase and only 10 subjects were randomized to crossover treatment. All randomized subjects completed the study. Data analysis includes the 5 withdrawals completing APAP pressurized comparison plus the 10 subjects completing study procedures.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
APAP Pressurized Comparison
Comparison usage to determine APAP average 90% pressure (APAP P90) for initial treatment period and to assess adherence for randomization periods for 6-8 weeks or 4-6 weeks. Subjects will then be randomized to Group 1 first, or Group 2 first, then crossover to the other group.
15
Group 1 Crossover Treatment
Randomized to APAP for 4 weeks followed by crossover to CPAP for 4 weeks after APAP settings for 4-8 weeks.
0
Group 2 Crossover Treatment
Randomized to CPAP for 4 weeks followed by crossover to APAP for 4 weeks after APAP settings for 4-8 weeks.
0
Total15

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicAPAP Pressurized ComparisonGroup 1 Crossover TreatmentGroup 2 Crossover TreatmentTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
15 Participants0 Participants0 Participants15 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Continuous14.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.1
14.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.1
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
15 participants15 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
7 Participants7 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
8 Participants8 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 150 / 50 / 5
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 150 / 50 / 5
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 150 / 50 / 5

Outcome results

Primary

Adherence Comparison of APAP vs.CPAP (% Days Device Used and % Days Device Used >4 Hours)

Randomized crossover period comparison of adherence between APAP and CPAP calculated from therapy usage hours.

Time frame: end of study visit at 12-16 weeks

Population: For data analysis we combined APAP data together and CPAP data together regardless of the order of randomization, yielding 10 subjects for APAP adherence and 10 subjects for CPAP adherence. In the data analysis below the column labeled Group 1 contains all APAP data and Group 2 contains all CPAP data.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
APAP Pressure ComparisonAdherence Comparison of APAP vs.CPAP (% Days Device Used and % Days Device Used >4 Hours)% days device used62.5 percentage of daysStandard Deviation 27.2
APAP Pressure ComparisonAdherence Comparison of APAP vs.CPAP (% Days Device Used and % Days Device Used >4 Hours)% days device used >4h42.7 percentage of daysStandard Deviation 29
Group 2Adherence Comparison of APAP vs.CPAP (% Days Device Used and % Days Device Used >4 Hours)% days device used61.4 percentage of daysStandard Deviation 25.6
Group 2Adherence Comparison of APAP vs.CPAP (% Days Device Used and % Days Device Used >4 Hours)% days device used >4h44.3 percentage of daysStandard Deviation 29.4
Primary

Difference Between Optimal Pressure (cm H2O) Derived From APAP run-in Period Versus Result of CPAP Titration Study

The aim of this study is to establish APAP as an effective treatment modality for OSAS in the pediatric population. We hypothesize that APAP can effectively approximate the pressure determined by PSG CPAP titration as measured by the average 90th pressure percentile and average CPAP pressure delivered to the patient. The in-lab CPAP titration PSG following initial diagnosis of OSA is the current standard of therapy. APAP would potentially bridge the gap between the time of diagnosis and the follow up PSG for CPAP titration, allowing for more prompt intervention.

Time frame: First visit after APAP run-in at 6-8 weeks

Population: The APAP pressure comparison group included 15 participants. After this initial period, 5 participants withdrew from the study. The remaining 10 participants were randomized to Group 1 or 2.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
APAP Pressure ComparisonDifference Between Optimal Pressure (cm H2O) Derived From APAP run-in Period Versus Result of CPAP Titration StudyAPAP 90 percent pressure7.3 cmH2OStandard Deviation 2.6
APAP Pressure ComparisonDifference Between Optimal Pressure (cm H2O) Derived From APAP run-in Period Versus Result of CPAP Titration StudyCPAP titration PSG pressure9.4 cmH2OStandard Deviation 2.6
Secondary

Comparison of Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Questionnaire Score Between Baseline and Each Randomization Period

Comparison of Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory questionnaire score between baseline (at time of enrollment in the study) and each group (APAP, CPAP) after randomization period for the 10 subjects who completed the study. The scale scores range between 0-100. Higher scores indicate better health related quality of life. Healthy: 81.34-100, at risk: 81.33-65.4, unhealthy \<65.4

Time frame: 12-16 weeks

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
APAP Pressure ComparisonComparison of Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Questionnaire Score Between Baseline and Each Randomization Period61.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.9
Group 2Comparison of Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Questionnaire Score Between Baseline and Each Randomization Period65.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.2
Group 2Comparison of Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Questionnaire Score Between Baseline and Each Randomization Period68.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.3
Secondary

Epworth Sleepiness Scale Questionnaire

Comparison of Epworth Sleepiness scale questionnaire score between baseline (at time of enrollment in the study) and each group (APAP, CPAP) after randomization period for the 10 subjects who completed the study. The scale range is from 0 to 24, with a value of 10 or greater suggesting significance for sleep disordered breathing.

Time frame: 12-16 weeks

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
APAP Pressure ComparisonEpworth Sleepiness Scale Questionnaire10.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.2
Group 2Epworth Sleepiness Scale Questionnaire7.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5
Group 2Epworth Sleepiness Scale Questionnaire7.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.3
Secondary

Michigan Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire

Comparison of Michigan pediatric sleep questionnaire score between baseline (at time of enrollment in the study) and each group (APAP, CPAP) after randomization period for the 10 subjects who completed the study. The scale range is from 0 to 1, Normal \<0.33, at risk is 0.33-0.55 and \>0.55 abnormal.

Time frame: 12-16 weeks

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
APAP Pressure ComparisonMichigan Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire0.65 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.2
Group 2Michigan Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire0.44 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.2
Group 2Michigan Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire0.39 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.2

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026