Elevated levels of Lp-PLA2 associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease

November 19, 2017

"Proponents of in-laboratory testing argue that patients performing in-lab testing might have better outcomes than those performing home testing. For example, during in-lab testing, the patient spends a greater amount of time with a technologist who is able to educate the patient about OSA and CPAP and help the patient overcome any barriers to diagnosis and treatment that might arise during testing," said Dr. Kuna. "But our results did not find a difference between home versus in-lab testing in terms of clinical outcomes. The two management pathways appear to be equivalent in terms of patients' functional outcomes and ability to use CPAP treatment."

While prospective studies are needed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of home portable monitor testing, medical care costs were examined in the study. "Those results are still being analyzed, but we believe that they will show that home portable monitor testing is less expensive than in-laboratory testing," said Dr. Kuna. Such a result, combined with the equivalent results of portable monitor testing in terms of health-related outcomes suggest that the portable devices may soon make in-lab testing a thing of the past for many OSA patients.

"Our study indicates that home portable monitor testing can be used to diagnose and manage patients with OSA," said Dr. Kuna. "Greater use of portable monitors will improve patient access to care and hopefully reduce medical care cost by replacing an expensive test (in-lab polysomnography) with the less expensive home testing."

Source: American Thoracic Society