Table 2. Three-group response to treatment categorization.
Required criteria |
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Response | Comments from notes | Changes to medication | On monotherapy at last FU, n = 92 (%)* | On combined treatment at last FU, n = 34 (%) | ΔESS (no. of patients available)† |
Complete response | ‘Great, excellent, entirely satisfactory, very well indeed’ | None | 43 (47) | 6 (18) | −9.83 ± 4.13 (18) |
Partial response | ‘Reasonably well controlled, doing better, better overall’ | Dose increase or drug added | 19 (21) | 13 (38) | −4.38 ± 4.91 (16) |
Poor response | ‘Still sleepy, has not done well, intolerable SEs’ | Medication changed | 30 (33) | 15 (44) | −3.95 ± 5.16 (20) |
ESS, Epworth Sleepiness score; SEs, side effects; FU, follow-up.
P = 0.009. Comparison of treatment outcome between monotherapy and combined treatment using chi-square wilh Cramer’s V product.
P = 0.001. Analysis was performed using the Kruskal–Wallis lest with Dunn’s multiple comparison lest. Complete response versus poor response, P = 0.002. Complete response versus partial response, P = 0.005. Δ: delta. Dala are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD).