Key result
Among hospitalized patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, 66% had never been screened for obstructive sleep apnea, with 75% of unscreened patients found to be at high risk.
Why the study?
Despite high OSA prevalence in AF and evidence that OSA management reduces AF recurrence, screening rates and patient willingness for diagnostic evaluation in persistent AF were unclear.
What are the screening rates for OSA in patients with persistent AF, and are high-risk patients willing to undergo further diagnostic evaluation?
Cohort (n=254)
No
What are the screening rates for OSA in patients with persistent AF, and are high-risk patients willing to undergo further diagnostic evaluation?
Most patients with persistent AF are not screened for OSA despite a high prevalence of high-risk individuals, the majority of whom are willing to undergo further diagnostic evaluation.
OSA screening gaps persist in persistent AF; leaves open whether systematic evaluation improves outcomes.
BACKGROUND: "There is a high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). There is also strong evidence that proper OSA management can reduce AF recurrence." Polysomnography is the gold standard for OSA diagnosis, but screening tests, such as STOP-BANG, have been successful in identifying patients at risk for OSA. Our study assesses screening rates for OSA in patients with persistent AF, and willingness of patients at increased risk for OSA towards further diagnostic evaluation. METHODS: A total of 254 persistent AF patients were surveyed regarding prior screening for OSA, and if previously unscreened, assessed with STOP-BANG. Prior cardioversions and willingness to undergo further workup was also recorded. Patients at risk for OSA were given educational brochures. Subjects with diagnosis of OSA were asked about their compliance with positive airway pressure therapy. RESULTS: Sixty-six percent of AF patients were never screened for OSA; 75% unscreened participants (95% CI: 68-81%) were at high risk for OSA. Patients with previous hospitalizations or electrical cardioversions were more frequently screened for OSA (P = 0.02, P = 0.03, respectively). Forty-three percent of high-risk individuals had a BMI < 30. Among patients at risk for OSA (score ≥ 3), the majority (n = 99, 79%) were interested in follow-up with a sleep study (n = 93, 74%). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a strong OSA-associated risk for AF, which is amenable to intervention, most patients with persistent AF are not assessed for OSA. Simple to use screening questionnaires are sensitive and can reliably identify patients at high risk for OSA, reserving costlier and somewhat inconvenient nocturnal polysomnography to only those at risk. We hope our study will help to push the AF and OSA connection into the spotlight in the primary care of patients with AF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khan et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (n=254). Obstructive sleep apnea screening vs. No screening was evaluated on Rate of prior OSA screening (95% CI 28-40). Among hospitalized patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, 66% had never been screened for obstructive sleep apnea, with 75% of unscreened patients found to be at high risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: