Optimal level of continuous positive airway pressure: auto-adjusting titration versus titration with a predictive equation

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2013 May;122(5):339-43. doi: 10.1177/000348941312200509.

Abstract

Objectives: The aims of the present study were twofold. We sought to compare two methods of titrating the level of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) - auto-adjusting titration and titration using a predictive equation - with full-night manual titration used as the benchmark. We also investigated the reliability of the two methods in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS).

Methods: Twenty consecutive adult patients with OSAS who had successful, full-night manual and auto-adjusting CPAP titration participated in this study. The titration pressure level was calculated with a previously developed predictive equation based on body mass index and apnea-hypopnea index.

Results: The mean titration pressure levels obtained with the manual, auto-adjusting, and predictive equation methods were 9.0 +/- 3.6, 9.4 +/- 3.0, and 8.1 +/- 1.6 cm H2O,respectively. There was a significant difference in the concordance within the range of +/- 2 cm H2O (p = 0.019) between both the auto-adjusting titration and the titration using the predictive equation compared to the full-night manual titration. However, there was no significant difference in the concordance within the range of +/- 1 cm H2O (p > 0.999).

Conclusions: When compared to full-night manual titration as the standard method, auto-adjusting titration appears to be more reliable than using a predictive equation for determining the optimal CPAP level in patients with OSAS.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Body Mass Index
  • Continuous Positive Airway Pressure / instrumentation
  • Continuous Positive Airway Pressure / methods*
  • Equipment Design
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Polysomnography
  • Sleep Apnea, Obstructive / therapy*