Trial reportSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2013
Assessment of the impact on compliance of a new CPAP system in obstructive sleep apnea.
Trial report in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pressure modification or humidification for improving usage of continuous positive airway pressure machines in adults with obstructive sleep apnoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Trial
- Personalized comfort settings in positive airway pressure machines using a causal inference approach: a retrospective observational analysis.Frontiers in sleep · 2026Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of switching from a previous-generation to a new-generation mask for positive airway pressure therapy of sleep apnea using remote care.Sleep medicine: X · 2024Article
- Usability evaluation of a novel compact pneumatic compression device for the treatment of lymphoedema: Pilot study.Phlebology · 2022Article
- Automatic Derivation of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Settings: Comparison with In-Laboratory Titration.Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea) · 2020Article
- Telemedicine-based proactive patient management during positive airway pressure therapy: Impact on therapy termination rate.Somnologie : Schlafforschung und Schlafmedizin = Somnology : sleep research and sleep medicine · 2017Article
- Treatments for Obstructive Sleep Apnea.Journal of clinical outcomes management : JCOM · 2016Article
- Impact of a New Nasal Pillows Mask on Patients' Acceptance, Compliance, and Willingness to Remain on CPAP Therapy.Sleep disorders · 2016Article
- Innovative treatments for adults with obstructive sleep apnea.Nature and science of sleep · 2014Review
- CPAP interface: satisfaction and side effects.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the efficacy of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), compliance with therapy remains suboptimal.The aim of this study was to determine whether the use of S9TM increased compliance in established CPAP users.
methodsSubjects with OSA (50) were recruited into the study. When subjects entered the study, 28 days of respective compliance data were downloaded from the patient's usual CPAP device. Subjects trialled the S9 CPAP for 28 days.Subjects then resumed use of their usual CPAP for 28 days.Compliance data from the patient's usual CPAP pre- and post-trialling S9 were compared with data from the S9 CPAP.
resultsPatients were significantly more compliant when using the S9 than their usual CPAP device both pre- and post-S9 based on average daily usage. CPAP pre-S906.58±1.95(mean hours±SD), S907.08±1.18 h and CPAP post-S906.71±1.72 h. The difference between CPAP pre-S9 and S9 was 0.5 h (p00.003). The difference between S9 and CPAP post-S9 was 0.35 h (p00.01). There was no significant difference between CPAP pre-S9 and CPAP post-S9 (p00.34).Patients also completed questionnaires comparing the S9 system to their usual device. Subjective feedback showed a strong preference for the S9.
conclusionsParticipants were significantly more compliant when using the S9 than their usual CPAP device both pre and post-S9 use
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.