Background: Evaluation and interpretation of the literature on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) allows for consolidation and determination of the key factors important for clinical management of the adult OSA patient. Toward this goal, an international collaborative of multidisciplinary experts in sleep apnea evaluation and treatment have produced the International Consensus statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (ICS:OSA). Methods: Using previously defined methodology, focal topics in OSA were assigned as literature review (LR), evidence-based review (EBR), or evidencebased review with recommendations (EBR-R) formats. Each topic incorporated the available and relevant evidence which was summarized and graded on study quality. Each topic and section underwent iterative review and the ICS:OSA was created and reviewed by all authors for consensus. Results: The ICS:OSA addresses OSA syndrome definitions, pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors for disease, screening methods, diagnostic testing types, multiple treatment modalities, and effects of OSA treatment on multiple OSA-associated comorbidities. Specific focus on outcomes with positive airway pressure (PAP) and surgical treatments were evaluated. Conclusion:This review of the literature consolidates the available knowledge and identifies the limitations of the current evidence on OSA. This effort aims to create a resource for OSA evidence-based practice and identify future research needs. Knowledge gaps and research opportunities include improving the metrics of OSA disease, determining the optimal OSA screening paradigms, developing strategies for PAP adherence and longitudinal care, enhancing selection of PAP alternatives and surgery, understanding health risk outcomes, and translating evidence into individualized approaches to therapy.

Objectives: Numerous therapies exist for adult obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), creating potential for patient decisional conflict (DC) that impacts treatment adherence and post-treatment regret. We evaluated the prevalence of elevated DC in OSA patients presenting for positive airway pressure (PAP) alternative therapies and identified gaps in available resources about OSA therapies.Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed based on questionnaires completed by adult OSA patients presenting to an academic sleep surgery clinic from March to October 2020. Surveys examined sleep symptoms, sleep apnea treatment history, goals of therapy, and the SURE checklist, a validated 4-item DC screening scale. Additional qualitative data about OSA decision tool needs were queried with structured interviews in a smaller subset of patients.Results: Among 100 respondents, 60 were open to multiple treatment options, whereas 22 were not interested in surgical treatment. Eighty-one respondents (81%) had elevated DC (SURE score < 4). High DC was not associated with CPAP history, OSA severity, or daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale score ≥ 10). Elevated DC was related to uncertainty regarding optimal treatment choice in 54% of respondents (n = 54), and lack of knowledge regarding risks and benefits of each treatment option in 71% (n = 71). Common themes identified in 9 interviewed patients suggested helpful resources should ideally compare treatment modalities and educate on surgery details, efficacy, and recovery.Conclusions: The majority of OSA patients presenting to sleep surgery clinics have elevated decisional conflict influenced by limited knowledge about options and the risks and benefits of each therapy. There is a need for decision tools that can reduce decisional conflict and promote equitable knowledge about PAP alternative OSA treatments.

IMPORTANCE Kidney transplant (KT) and liver transplant (LT) in HIV-positive patients have become more widely adopted. Data looking at long-term outcomes of patient and graft survival are lacking.OBJECTIVE To compare the long-term outcomes of KT and LT in HIV-positive recipients with matched HIV-negative recipients.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective, single-center, cohort, study using data from 2000 to 2019. Patients were observed until death, or graft failure requiring retransplant. All HIV-positive patients who underwent KT and/or LT between 2000 and 2019 were included. Propensity matching was performed to the corresponding HIV-negative cohort, which was obtained from the University of California, San Francisco's transplant recipient registry. The data were analyzed from 2020 to 2021. EXPOSURES HIV infection. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESPatient and graft survival for KT and patient survival for LT. Incidence of acute rejection and its association with KT graft survival. RESULTS For KT, 655 HIV-negative recipients (mean [SD] age, 52.3 [13.6] years; 450 [68.7%] were men) and 119 HIV-positive recipients (mean [SD] age, 51.7 [9.4] years; 86 [72.3%] were men) were included. Patient survival was 79.6% (95% CI, 73.6%-86.1%) and 53.6% (95% CI, 38.9%-74.0%) at 15 years posttransplant, respectively. Graft survival was 57.0% (95% CI, 47.8%-68.0%) and 75.0% (95% CI, 65.3%-86.2%) at 15 years posttransplant, respectively. Diagnosis of HIV was not associated with worse graft survival (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.61-1.97; P = .77). For LT, 80 HIV-positive recipients (mean [SD] age, 52.6 [8.2] years; 53 [66.3%] were men) and 440 HIV-negative recipients (mean [SD] age, 54.6 [12.8] years; 291 [66.1%] were men) were included. Patient survival was 75.7% (95% CI, 71.8%-79.8%) for HIV-negative LT recipients and 70.0% (95% CI, 60.6%-80.8%) for HIV-positive LT recipients at 15 years posttransplant. Diagnosis of HIV was not a statistically significant predictor of patient survival (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.83-2.24; P = .22). In KT, HIV-positive patients with at least 1 episode of acute rejection had a graft survival of 52.8% (95% CI, 38.4%-72.5%; P < .001) at 15 years posttransplant, compared with 91.8% in those without AR. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this single-center cohort study, KT and LT in HIV-positive patients had comparable long-term outcomes with those in matched HIV-negative patients. The high incidence of acute rejection was associated with reduced graft survival. The findings support providing transplant to HIV-positive patients, which may be an appropriate use of transplant resources and provides equitable access for HIV-positive patients.

IMPORTANCE During the novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, telehealth has become a vital component of health care delivery. For otolaryngology evaluations, examination of the ear and oropharynx is important but difficult to achieve remotely.OBJECTIVE To assess the feasibility of patient use of low-cost digital videoscopes and smartphones for examination of the ear and oropharynx. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA prospective quality improvement study was conducted in an academic adult otolaryngology clinic including 23 patients who presented for an in-person appointment and owned a smartphone device. The study was conducted from July 1 to 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONSParticipants were asked to capture pictures and videos of their ear canals and oropharynx with digital videoscopes and their smartphones under real-time guidance over a telehealth platform. They were then surveyed about their experience. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcomes were ratings by health care clinicians and a blinded otolaryngologist reviewer of image acceptability. Secondary outcomes included participant time to image acquisition and willingness to purchase digital videoscopes for telehealth use. RESULTSOf the 23 participants included, 14 were women (61%); mean age was 50 years (range, 21 to 80 years). Of the images obtained using the digital otoscope ear examination, 95% were considered acceptable by the health care clinicians and 91% were considered acceptable by the blinded reviewer; 16 participants (70%) reported that the otoscope was easy to use. The mean time to acquire images for both ears was 114 seconds (95% CI, 84-145 seconds). Twenty-one participants (91%) were willing to pay for a digital otoscope for telehealth use. For the oropharyngeal examination, a greater proportion of smartphone video examinations were considered acceptable by clinicians (63% acceptability) and the blinded reviewer (55%) compared with the digital endoscope (clinicians, 40%; blinded reviewer, 14%). The mean time required for the oropharyngeal examination smartphone video capture was shorter at 35 seconds compared with both the digital endoscope (difference, −27 seconds; 95% CI, −7 to −47 seconds) and smartphone photo capture (difference, −53 seconds; 95% CI, −20 to −87 seconds).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Digital otoscopes and smartphones apparently can facilitate remote head and neck physical examination in telehealth. Digital otoscopes were useful for ear examinations, and smartphone videos appeared to be the most useful for oropharyngeal examinations. Further studies are required to determine specific diagnostic capabilities in various telehealth practice settings.

Objectives To characterize the treatment goals and values of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Study Design Mixed methods design based on semistructured interviews followed by cross-sectional surveys. Setting Academic medical center and integrated managed care consortium. Methods Phase 1 involved qualitative analysis of focus groups and interviews to define treatment goal categories. Phase 2 included analysis of cross-sectional surveys on most important treatment goals from patients with OSA presenting to sleep surgery clinic. Positive airway pressure (PAP) use, Epworth Sleepiness Scale score, and apnea-hypopnea index were obtained to determine influences on goal choices. Results During focus groups and interviews, treatment goal themes identified included improving sleep quality, reducing daytime sleepiness, snoring sound reduction, and health risk reduction. In phase 2, 536 patients were surveyed, and they reported the primary treatment goals of health risk reduction (35%), sleep quality improvement (28%), daytime sleepiness improvement (21%), and snoring sound reduction (16%). The primary treatment goal was associated with age ( P < .0001), excessive daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale score >10, P < .0001), PAP use status ( P < .0001), and OSA severity (apnea-hypopnea index, P < .0001). Severity of OSA was associated with increasing proportion of patients choosing health risk reduction as the main treatment goal ( P < .05). Conclusions Adult OSA treatment goal choices vary with age, symptoms, PAP history, and OSA severity. Understanding patient-specific goals is the essential first step in the shared decision-making process when choosing surgical or nonsurgical treatments. Ultimately, goal-focused discussions ensure alignment of priorities and definitions of success between the patient and the provider.