Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 2;2019(12):CD003531. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003531.pub4

Meurice 2007.

Methods Randomised, multicentre, parallel group trial
Participants N = 83. Mean age: 56 years; AHI: 52; ESS: 11.5
Inclusion criteria: new diagnosis of OSA; CPAP‐naive; AHI > 30
Interventions Four auto‐CPAP machines assessed:
  1. GK 418 P, 3.1 version

  2. AutoSet Spirit, 302 version

  3. PV 10I, firmware 0.92 version

  4. Somnosmart 1, 2.02 version


All 4 compared against fixed pressure CPAP
Study duration: 24 weeks
Outcomes
  1. Machine usage (average hours used)

  2. AHI

  3. Symptoms (ESS)

  4. Withdrawals

  5. Quality of life (SF‐36)

Funding & conflicts of interest statements Not provided
Notes Data aggregated from 4 auto‐CPAP groups
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote: "The randomisation was carried out centrally..."
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "...randomly coded envelopes opened by a coordinator from envelopes batched for each centre in order to have similar proportions of patients in each group from each centre."
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 Machine usage, symptoms, quality of life, withdrawal, adverse effects Unclear risk Information not available
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 AHI, blood pressure, treatment pressure Low risk These outcomes unlikely to be affected by awareness of treatment group.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 Machine usage, symptoms, quality of life, withdrawal, adverse effects Unclear risk Information not available
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 AHI, blood pressure, treatment pressure Low risk These outcomes unlikely to be affected by awareness of treatment group.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Participants who withdrew were not included in the analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Information not available
Other bias Low risk No concerns identified