1012 Personalizing Treatment for OSA: A Pilot Study Comparing Two Mobile Health Technologies
Introduction Mobile health technologies (MHTs) that measure sleep architecture may help clinicians personalize treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). New, consumer-friendly EEGs have recently become available. The purpose of this pilot was to assess the feasibility of using this technology to...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Sleep (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2019-04, Vol.42 (Supplement_1), p.A407-A407 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Introduction Mobile health technologies (MHTs) that measure sleep architecture may help clinicians personalize treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). New, consumer-friendly EEGs have recently become available. The purpose of this pilot was to assess the feasibility of using this technology to reliably measure outcomes of different therapies at home, as compared to existing technologies. Methods Prior to designing a clinical trial, a pilot study was initiated to evaluate the usability of a new EEG technology. A within-subjects design was used to test two therapies, CPAP and a mandibular advancement device (MAD). One participant consented to conducting a series of therapy trials and monitoring outcomes using the EEG and a single-lead ECG sleep monitor for comparison. The participant used his CPAP for two weeks and on the last two nights, used both MHTs to assess sleep quality. He subsequently switched therapies from CPAP to the MAD. After two weeks wearing the MAD, he again used both sleep monitors for two nights. This protocol was repeated four times. Qualitative data were also collected to assess the participant’s experience. Results The participant was able to concurrently wear the EEG headband with a full-face CPAP mask. The mask did not interfere with the EEG’s data collection. The EEG data correlated well with ECG data (time stamps, fragmentation, etc.). Switching therapies produced a change in this participant’s sleep architecture, as recorded by both MHTs. Consistent differences between therapies were noted each time the protocol was repeated. The participant reported that each MHT was easy to use at home. He preferred the EEG as it had a phone app that provided him with immediate access to his results. Conclusion This pilot demonstrated the feasibility of using either type of mobile health technology to monitor treatment outcomes. Either one would be suitable for use in a future clinical trial. The EEG’s phone app may facilitate greater participant engagement. Support (If Any) None |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0161-8105 1550-9109 |
DOI: | 10.1093/sleep/zsz067.1009 |