Want to take quizzes and track your credits?
Is baseline rhinitis status (allergic, nonallergic, or none) associated with change in nasal congestion when continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is used?
In this cohort study of 102 participants with newly diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea, CPAP was associated with improved subjective nasal congestion on average, but less so in participants with baseline allergic rhinitis.
Baseline allergic rhinitis may predict which patients are more vulnerable to potential congestive effects of CPAP.
Nasal congestion occurring after continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment initiation impairs CPAP adherence. Allergic rhinitis is associated with worsening nasal congestion in patients who are exposed to nonallergic triggers. Use of CPAP presents potential nonallergic triggers (eg, humidity, temperature, pressure, and airflow).
To compare nasal congestion among CPAP users with allergic rhinitis, nonallergic rhinitis, and no rhinitis. We hypothesize that CPAP patients with baseline allergic rhinitis are more likely to experience a worsening of nasal congestion (or less improvement in nasal congestion) compared with patients with no baseline rhinitis.
Design, Setting, and Participants
This prospective cohort study included consecutive patients newly diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea in a tertiary sleep center who were using CPAP therapy 3 months after diagnosis. Baseline rhinitis status was assigned as allergic rhinitis, nonallergic rhinitis, or no rhinitis, based on questionnaire responses and past allergy testing. Data were collected from 2004 to 2008 and analyzed from July 2019 to February 2020.
Main Outcomes and Measures
At baseline before CPAP exposure and again 3 months later, subjective nasal congestion was measured with the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale and a visual analog scale (VAS), each scored from 0 to 100 (100 = worst congestion). Changes in nasal congestion were tested over 3 months for the whole cohort, within each rhinitis subgroup (paired t test), and between rhinitis subgroups (multivariate linear regression).
The study cohort comprised 102 participants, of whom 61 (60%) were male and the mean (SD) age was 50 (13). The study included 23 (22.5%) participants with allergic rhinitis, 67 (65.7%) with nonallergic rhinitis, and 12 (11.8%) with no rhinitis. Nasal congestion improved from baseline to 3 months in the whole cohort (mean [SD] NOSE score, 38  to 27 , mean [SD] change, −10 ; 95% CI, −15 to −6; mean [SD] VAS score, 41  to 32 ; mean [SD] change, −10 ; 95% CI, [−15 to −4]) and in each rhinitis subgroup. Adjusted improvement in nasal congestion at 3 months was significantly less in the allergic rhinitis subgroup compared with the no rhinitis subgroup (positive difference means less improvement) compared with baseline: NOSE score 14 (95% CI, 1 to 28) and VAS score 15 (95% CI, 0 to 30).
Conclusions and Relevance
Initiation of CPAP was associated with improved subjective nasal congestion, but less improvement in patients with baseline allergic rhinitis. Baseline allergic rhinitis may predict which patients are more vulnerable to potential congestive effects of CPAP.
Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates
JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC
CME Disclosure Statement: Unless noted, all individuals in control of content reported no relevant financial relationships. If applicable, all relevant financial relationships have been mitigated.
Accepted for Publication: February 10, 2020.
Corresponding Author: Jonathan R. Skirko, MD, MPH, University of Utah, Division of Otolaryngology—Head & Neck Surgery, 100 N Mario Capecchi Dr, Salt Lake City, UT 84113 (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Published Online: April 9, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2020.0261
Author Contributions: Drs Skirko and Weaver had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Concept and design: Skirko, Shusterman, Weaver.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Skirko, James, Weaver.
Drafting of the manuscript: Skirko.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
Statistical analysis: Skirko.
Obtained funding: Weaver.
Administrative, technical, or material support: All authors.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Weaver reported grants from the National Institutes of Health and other support from the Department of Veterans Affairs during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.
Funding/Support: Supported by grants K23 HL068849 (Weaver), R01 HL084139 (Weaver), and T32 DC000018 (Ernest A. Weymuller, Jr., MD) from the National Institutes of Health, and resources from the VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington.
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article do not represent the views of the US Department of Veterans Affairs or US government.
You currently have no searches saved.
You currently have no courses saved.