Cited by 16Obstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchGastroesophageal reflux and treatmentsSleep and related disorders

A Randomized Crossover Trial Comparing Autotitrating and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Subjects With Symptoms of Aerophagia: Effects on Compliance and Subjective Symptoms

Open access
Shirlaw, Teresa, Hanssen, Kevin, Duce, Brett, Hukins, Craig·2017·Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine

Abstract

Study objectives To assess the benefit and tolerance of autotitrating positive airway pressure (APAP) versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in subjects who experience aerophagia.Methods This is the report of a prospective, two-week, double-blinded, randomized crossover trial set in an Australian clinical sleep laboratory in a tertiary hospital. Fifty-six subjects who reported symptoms of aerophagia that they attributed to CPAP were recruited. Full face masks were used by 39 of the 56 subjects recruited. Subjects were randomly and blindly allocated to either CPAP at their treatment recommended pressure or APAP 6-20 cm H 2 O, in random order. Subjects spent two weeks on each therapy mode. Therapy usage hours, 95th centile pressure, maximum pressure, 95th centile leak, and residual apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) were reported at the end of each two-week treatment period. Functional Outcome of Sleepiness Questionnaire, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and visual analog scale to measure symptoms of aerophagia were also completed at the end of each 2-week treatment arm.Results The median pressure (P < .001) and 95th centile pressure (P < .001) were reduced with APAP but no differences in compliance (P = .120) and residual AHI were observed. APAP reduced the symptoms of bloating (P = .011), worst episode of bloating (P = .040), flatulence (P = .010), and belching (P = .001) compared to CPAP. There were no differences in Epworth Sleepiness Scale or Functional Outcome of Sleepiness Questionnaire outcomes between CPAP and APAP.Conclusions APAP therapy reduces the symptoms of aerophagia while not affecting compliance when compared with CPAP therapy.Clinical trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry at https://www.anzctr.org.au, trial number ACTRN12611001250921.Commentary A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 859.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5664/jcsm.6658

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a double-blinded randomized crossover study, APAP reduced symptoms of aerophagia.

    “In this double-blinded, randomized crossover study by Shirlaw et al., APAP reduced symptoms of aerophagia.1158”

    From International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (2023) · cites this paper as [1158]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [12]12. Watson NF, Mystkowski SK. Aerophagia and gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients using continuous positive airway pressure: a preliminary observation. J Clin Sleep Med. 2008;4:434-438.
  2. [19]19. Stepnowsky CJ, Bardwell W a, Moore PJ, Ancoli-Israel S, Dimsdale JE. Psychologic correlates of compliance with continuous positive airway pressure. Sleep. 2002;25(7):758-762. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12405612.
  3. [26]26. Mayoralas Alises S, Gómez Mendieta M, Díaz Lobato S. Aerophagia due to noninvasive mechanical ventilation: a first manifestation of silent gastric carcinoma. Arch Bronconeumol (English Ed. 2003;39(7):321-323. http://www.archbronconeumol.org/en/aerophagia-due-noninvasive-mechanical- ventilation/articulo/13046508/. Accessed April 26, 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shirlaw, T., Hanssen, K., Duce, B., & Hukins, C.
Affiliations
Princess Alexandra Hospital (AU)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine
Published
2017-07-15
Volume
13
Issue
7
Pages
881-888
ISSN
  • 1550-9389 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-9397
OpenAlex
W2621863812
Cited by
16
References
23
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation; Science & Engineering Faculty
Funders
Queensland Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
Keywords
aerophagia, continuous positive airway pressure, sleep apnea, medication adherence, bloating, flatulence, belching, sleepiness, apnea-hypopnea index, CPAP intolerance, full-face mask, residual apnea-hypopnea index, Epworth Sleepiness Scale
MeSH terms
Aerophagy, Aged, Australia, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Patient Compliance, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Treatment Outcome, Polysomnography, Cross-Over Studies, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review