↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Retrospective, nonrandomized controlled study on autoadjusting, dual-pressure positive airway pressure therapy for a consecutive series of complex insomnia disorder patients

Overview of attention for article published in Nature and science of sleep, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Retrospective, nonrandomized controlled study on autoadjusting, dual-pressure positive airway pressure therapy for a consecutive series of complex insomnia disorder patients
Published in
Nature and science of sleep, March 2017
DOI 10.2147/nss.s120048
Pubmed ID
Authors

Barry Krakow, Natalia D McIver, Victor A Ulibarri, Michael R Nadorff

Abstract

Emerging evidence shows that positive airway pressure (PAP) treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and upper airway resistance syndrome (UARS) in chronic insomnia patients (proposed "complex insomnia" disorder) leads to substantial decreases in insomnia severity. Although continuous PAP (CPAP) is the pressure mode most widely researched, intolerance to fixed pressurized air is rarely investigated or described in comorbidity patients. This retrospective study examined dual pressure, autoadjusting PAP modes in chronic, complex insomnia disorder patients. Chronic insomnia disorder patients (mean [SD] insomnia severity index [ISI] =19.11 [3.34]) objectively diagnosed with OSA or UARS and using either autobilevel PAP device or adaptive servoventilation (ASV) device after failing CPAP therapy (frequently due to intolerance to pressurized air, poor outcomes, or emergence of CSA) were divided into PAP users (≥20 h/wk) and partial users (<20 h/wk) for comparison. Subjective and objective baseline and follow-up measures were analyzed. Of the 302 complex insomnia patients, PAP users (n=246) averaged 6.10 (1.78) nightly hours and 42.71 (12.48) weekly hours and partial users (n=56) averaged 1.67 (0.76) nightly hours and 11.70 (5.31) weekly hours. For mean (SD) decreases in total ISI scores, a significant (group × time) interaction was observed (F[1,300]=13.566; P<0.0001) with PAP users (-7.59 [5.92]; d=1.63) showing superior results to partial users (-4.34 [6.13]; d=0.81). Anecdotally, patients reported better tolerability with advanced PAP compared to previous experience with CPAP. Both adaptive servoventilation and autobilevel PAP showed similar ISI score improvement without statistical differences between devices. Total weekly hours of PAP use correlated inversely with change in insomnia symptoms (r=-0.256, P<0.01). Insomnia severity significantly decreased in patients using autoadjusting PAP devices, but the study design restricts interpretation to an association. Future research must elucidate the interaction between insomnia and OSA/UARS as well as the adverse influence of pressure intolerance on PAP adaptation in complex insomnia patients. Randomized controlled studies must determine whether advanced PAP modes provide benefits over standard CPAP modes in these comorbidity patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 25%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 25%
Psychology 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Computer Science 2 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 13 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,879,822
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Nature and science of sleep
#373
of 629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,201
of 324,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature and science of sleep
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.