Trial reportSleep2025
Patient-reported quality of life outcomes with mandibular advancement versus continuous positive airway pressure: insights from the CRESCENT trial.
Trial report in Sleep, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04119999 (A Cardiosleep Research Program on Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Blood Pressure Control and Maladaptive Myocardial Remodeling), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
A Cardiosleep Research Program on Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Blood Pressure Control and Maladaptive Myocardial Remodeling
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Redefining Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Treatment in the Modern Era.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesWe compared mandibular advancement device (MAD) versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on quality-of-life (QoL) in a prespecified analysis of the CRESCENT trial.
methodsTwo hundred and twenty participants over age 40 with Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), hypertension, and increased cardiovascular risk from three public hospitals were randomly assigned to MAD or CPAP (1:1). Multi-dimensional QoL questionnaires were administered at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Three sleep-related QoL questionnaires: Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ), and Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI). Two generic QoL questionnaires: EuroQoL 5-D (EQ-5D) and Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF36).
resultsMAD adherence was 5.5 (3.9-6.9) hours at 6 months and 5.0 (3.3-6.1) hours at 12 months. CPAP adherence was 4.9 (3.3-6.1) hours at 6 months and 4.8 (3.3-5.7) hours at 12 months. Both groups showed improvements in sleep-related QoL. ESS improved at 6 and 12 months (p < .001), with a between-group difference favoring CPAP at 6 months (Δ 1.45 [0.44 to 2.46], p = .005). FOSQ improved at 6 and 12 months (p < .001), with a between-group difference favoring CPAP at 12 months (Δ -0.91 [-1.77 to -0.05], p = .038). SAQLI improved at 6 and 12 months (p < .001) without between-group differences. For generic QoL questionnaires, SF-36 improved in most domains at 6 and 12 months, with the Social Functioning section favoring CPAP at 12 months (p = .013). EQ-5D improved at 12 months, with a trend favoring CPAP (p = .053).
conclusionsMAD and CPAP effectively improved sleep-related QoL and some aspects of generic QoL. CPAP improved sleep-related QoL to a greater extent than MAD. CLINICAL TRIAL NAME: The Cardiosleep Research Program on OSA, Blood Pressure Control and Maladaptive Myocardial Remodeling-Non-inferiority Trial (CRESCENT). URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04119999?locStr=Singapore&country=Singapore&cond=Obstructive%20Sleep%20Apnea&aggFilters=ages:adult%20older,studyType:int&rank=6TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04119999.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39887015What 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.