The DS-14 questionnaire: psychometric characteristics and utility in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.

Little is known about type D personality in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The DS-14 questionnaire is the standard tool to assess this personality type, but it has not been properly validated in patients with OSA, nor has it been correlated with clinical features in these patients. PURPOSE: To determine the internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the DS-14 questionnaire, as well as the prevalence of type D personality in the overall OSA sample and subgroups. We assessed the influence of type D on perceived symptoms and its congruence with self-reported measures of personality, depression, fatigue, anxiety, quality of life, and quality of sleep. METHODS: Patients with OSA completed the DS-14 questionnaire, Big Five Inventory-2 questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire, Epworth Sleepiness Scale and Stanford Sleepiness Scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and Insomnia Severity Index, Fatigue Assessment Scale, and Checklist Individual Strength. After 1 month, the DS-14 questionnaire was repeated. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of type D personality was 32%. Internal consistency (negative affectivity: α = 0.880, social inhibition: α = 0.851) and diagnostic test-retest reliability (kappa value = 0.664) of the DS-14 questionnaire were high. Significantly more symptoms of anxiety, depression, poor sleep quality, fatigue, and a worse health perception were found in OSA with type D. Neither OSA severity nor REM predominance altered these observations. CONCLUSION: The DS-14 questionnaire showed excellent psychometric properties in patients with OSA. The prevalence of type D personality in patients with OSA was higher than in the general population. The presence of type D personality was associated with higher symptom burden.

Use of mandibular advancement devices for the treatment of primary snoring with or without obstructive sleep apnea (OSA): A systematic review.

The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the available scientific evidence on the benefit of mandibular advancement devices (MADs) in the treatment of primary snoring (PS). From 905 initially identified articles, 18 were selected. Papers that provided indirect information regarding obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) and/or sleep breathing disorders (SBD) were included. Information was obtained on monoblock and duoblock appliances from the selected studies. The devices were most commonly able to achieve 50%-70% of the maximum mandibular protrusion. The frequently used outcome measurements were the apnea-hypopnea index, Epworth sleepiness scale, and oxygen desaturation index, which all yielded positive post-treatment results. The most common side effects were temporomandibular joint pain and excessive salivation, which improved with time. Our findings indicated that the use of MADs, even with varying designs, improved outcomes in all the reported patient populations (PS, OSAS, and SBD). Despite the lack of studies on PS, the available evidence supports the use of MADs for treatment of PS. Snoring should be treated from a preventive and psychosocial perspective to avoid progression to more severe diseases that could have a significant medical and economic impact.

The impact of continuous positive airway pressure on blood pressure in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: evidence from a meta-analysis of placebo-controlled randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) might lower blood pressure, but evidence from clinical studies is inconsistent, perhaps as a result of small sample size or heterogeneity in study design. This study aimed to assess whether CPAP reduces ambulatory blood pressure in patients with OSAS, to quantify the effect size with precision, and to identify trial characteristics associated with the greatest blood pressure reductions. METHODS: We identified randomized controlled trials of CPAP vs placebo in patients with OSAS specifically reporting 24-hour ambulatory mean blood pressure (MBP). RESULTS: We included a total of 572 patients from 12 randomized controlled trials. According to a random-effects model, the pooled estimate of the effect of the CPAP intervention was a net decrease of 1.69 mm Hg in 24-hour MBP (95% confidence interval, -2.69 to -0.69). Statistical heterogeneity was moderate (I(2) = 41%). Predefined metaregression analyses estimated that 24-hour MBP would decrease by 0.89 mm Hg per 10-point increase in apnea-hypopnea index at entry (P = .006), by 0.74 mm Hg for each increase of 10 arousal events per hour slept (P = .008), and by 1.39 mm Hg for each 1-hour increase in effective nightly use of the CPAP device (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with OSAS, CPAP reduces 24-hour ambulatory MBP, with greater treatment-related reductions in ambulatory MBP among patients with a more severe degree of OSAS and a better effective nightly use of the CPAP device. These reductions in blood pressure are likely to contribute to a better prognosis in terms of adverse cardiovascular events.