Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: A crossover randomised controlled trial of oral mandibular advancement devices for obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea (TOMADO)
Authors: Quinnell, TG
Bennett, M
Jordan, J
Clutterbuck-James, AL
Davies, MG
Smith, IE
Oscroft, N
Pittman, MA
Cameron, M
Chadwick, R
Morrell, MJ
Glover, MJ
Fox-Rushby, JA
Sharples, LD
Keywords: Rationale Mandibular advancement devices (MADs);Obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea;Cost-effectiveness
Issue Date: 2014
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Citation: Thorax, 2014
Abstract: Rationale Mandibular advancement devices (MADs) are used to treat obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS) but evidence is lacking regarding their clinical and cost-effectiveness in less severe disease. Objectives To compare clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a range of MADs against no treatment in mild to moderate OSAHS. Measurements and methods This open-label, randomised, controlled, crossover trial was undertaken at a UK sleep centre. Adults with Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index (AHI) 5–<30/h and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score ≥9 underwent 6 weeks of treatment with three nonadjustable MADs: self-moulded (SleepPro 1; SP1); semi-bespoke (SleepPro 2; SP2); fully-bespoke MAD (bMAD); and 4 weeks no treatment. Primary outcome was AHI scored by a polysomnographer blinded to treatment. Secondary outcomes included ESS, quality of life, resource use and cost. Main results 90 patients were randomised and 83 were analysed. All devices reduced AHI compared with no treatment by 26% (95% CI 11% to 38%, p=0.001) for SP1, 33% (95% CI 24% to 41%) for SP2 and 36% (95% CI 24% to 45%, p<0.001) for bMAD. ESS was 1.51 (95% CI 0.73 to 2.29, p<0.001, SP1) to 2.37 (95% CI 1.53 to 3.22, p<0.001, bMAD) lower than no treatment (p<0.001 for all). Compliance was lower for SP1, which was the least preferred treatment at trial exit. All devices were cost-effective compared with no treatment at a £20 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) threshold. SP2 was the most cost-effective up to £39 800/QALY. Conclusions Non-adjustable MADs achieve clinically important improvements in mild to moderate OSAHS and are cost-effective.
ISSN: 1468-3296
Appears in Collections:Health Economics Research Group (HERG)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdf1.92 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.