Results of the randomised studies comparing telemedicine (TM) follow-up versus usual care for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) patients

First author [ref.]Patients nAHI events·h-1TM applicationAdherence TM versus usual carePatient satisfaction
Stepnowsky [38]45>15Interactive website with own CPAP data and guide for troubleshooting2 months: 4.1 versus 3.4 h·night-1 (statistically significant)No concerns of being remotely observed
Fox [44]75>15; mean: 42Feedback by phone3 months: 3.2 versus 1.7 h·night-1 (statistically significant)NA
Isetta [45]139Mean: 49Feedback by web tools6 months: 4.4 versus 4.2 h·night-1 (ns)Similar degree satisfaction
Anttalainen [46]#111Mean: 34Nurse adjustment phone/visits12 months: 6.4 versus 6.1 h·night-1 (ns)NA
Munafo [47]132Mean: 34 (TM), 27 (usual care)Multimedia approach to contact patient about their CPAP use1 month: 5.1 versus
4.7 h·night-1 (ns)
Very good acceptance of the TM programme
Frasnelli [48]223Median: 37 (TM),
40 (usual care)
Pneumologist adjustment by phone1 month: 5.3 versus
4.6 h·night-1 (statistically significant)
Overall satisfaction better in usual care group; privacy concerns
Hoet [49]46>20Sleep technician adjustment phone/visits3 months: 5.7 versus 4.2 h·night-1 (statistically significant)NA
Turino [50]100>15Pneumologist adjustment by phone3 months: 5.1 versus 4.9 h·night-1 (ns)Overall satisfaction better in usual care group; privacy concerns

AHI: apnoea/hypopnoea index; ns: not statistically significant; NA: not assessed. #: partially randomised; : patients selected at random.