Evidence Hub

Health effects of obstructive sleep apnoea and the effectiveness of continuous positive airways pressure: a systematic review of the research evidence

Wright J, Johns R, Watt I, Melville A, Sheldon T

BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1997

245 citations

Abstract

Objective: To examine the research evidence for the health consequences of obstructive sleep apnoea and the effectiveness of continuous positive airways pressure.

Design: A systematic review of published research, studies being identified by searching Medline (1966-96), Embase (1974-96), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) (1982-95); scanning citations; and consulting experts. Studies in all languages were considered which either investigated the association between obstructive sleep apnoea in adults and key health outcomes or evaluated the effectiveness of treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea with continuous positive airways pressure in adults.

Main outcome measures: Mortality, systematic hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, ischaemic heart disease, left ventricular hypertrophy, pulmonary hypertension, stroke, vehicle accidents, measures of daytime sleepiness, and quality of life.

Results: 54 epidemiological studies examined the association between sleep apnoea and health related outcomes. Most were poorly designed and only weak or contradictory evidence was found of an association with cardiac arrhythmias, ischaemic heart disease, cardiac failure, systemic or pulmonary hypertension, and stroke. Evidence of a link with sleepiness and road traffic accidents was stronger but inconclusive. Only one small randomised controlled trial evaluated continuous positive airways pressure. Five non-randomised controlled trials and 38 uncontrolled trials…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free