[Long term compliance with an oral protrusive appliance in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea]

Oral protrusive devices (OPD) are increasingly used in primary snoring and mild-to-moderate obstructive sleep disordered breathing. Due to evidence of reduced compliance with the well established standard treatment of nasal positive airway pressure (CPAP) and reports of patient preference for OPD treatment, particularly in mild cases, OPD may be considered another treatment alternative.

We contacted 192 patients suffering from obstructive sleep breathing disorder, who were treated between May 1996 and September 2001 with an OPD. The patients" use of the device was evaluated, as were any reasons for ceasing to use the device.

105 patients (54.4%) regularly used the appliance after a mean time of 22.7 12.3 month. 21 patients (10.9%) showed no primary compliance and stopped had using the device before the first somnographic follow-up after a mean time of 3.8 months. In this investigation 76 patients (80,2%) were classified as responders and 19 patients (20.8%) as primary non-responders. 22 responders (11.4%) demonstrated no secondary compliance after a mean of 21.9 8.8 months and the discontinued OPD treatment themselves. In 21 patients (10.9%) the nightly respiratory parameters decreased after a mean of 23.0 11.7 months; hence, those patients required CPAP. The cumulative risk using the device after four years as prescribed was 32.2%. We found a correlation between patient compliance, body-mass index and the amount of teeth in the upper and lower jaws.

OPD compliance seems to be lower than frequently expected. Regular follow-up investigations are necessary to ensure adequate treatment. Poor dental status and an excess body-mass index reduce patient compliance.