Association between Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Community-Acquired Pneumonia

Background We hypothesized that obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) can predispose individuals to lower airway infections and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) due to upper airway microaspiration. This study evaluated the association between OSA and CAP. Methods We performed a case-control study that included 82 patients with CAP and 41 patients with other infections (control group). The controls were matched according to age, sex and body mass index (BMI). A respiratory polygraph (RP) was performed upon admission for patients in both groups. The severity of pneumonia was assessed according to the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI). The associations between CAP and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), OSA, OSA severity and other sleep-related variables were evaluated using logistic regression models. The associations between OSA, OSA severity with CAP severity were evaluated with linear regression models and non-parametric tests. Findings No significant differences were found between CAP and control patients regarding anthropometric variables, toxic habits and risk factors for CAP. Patients with OSA, defined as individuals with an Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) ≥10, showed an increased risk of CAP (OR = 2·86, 95%CI 1·29–6·44, p = 0·01). Patients with severe OSA (AHI≥30) also had a higher risk of CAP (OR = 3·18, 95%CI 1·11–11·56, p = 0·047). In addition, OSA severity, defined according to the AHI quartile, was also significantly associated with CAP (p = 0·007). Furthermore, OSA was significantly associated with CAP severity (p = 0·0002), and OSA severity was also associated with CAP severity (p = 0·0006). Conclusions OSA and OSA severity are associated with CAP when compared to patients admitted to the hospital for non-respiratory infections. In addition, OSA and OSA severity are associated with CAP severity. These results support the potential role of OSA in the pathogenesis of CAP and could have clinical implications. This link between OSA and infection risk should be explored to investigate the relationships among gastroesophageal reflux, silent aspiration, laryngeal sensory dysfunction and CAP. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01071421


Introduction
Background 2 Scientific background and explanation of rationale Theories used in designing behavioral interventions

Methods
Participants 3 Eligibility criteria for participants, including criteria at different levels in recruitment/sampling plan (e.g., cities, clinics, subjects) Method of recruitment (e.g., referral, self-selection), including the sampling method if a systematic sampling plan was implemented Recruitment setting Settings and locations where the data were collected Interventions 4 Details of the interventions intended for each study condition and how and when they were actually administered, specifically including: Unit of assignment (the unit being assigned to study condition, e.g., individual, group, community) Method used to assign units to study conditions, including details of any restriction (e.g., blocking, stratification, minimization) Inclusion of aspects employed to help minimize potential bias induced due to non-randomization (e.g., matching) Whether or not participants, those administering the interventions, and those assessing the outcomes were blinded to study condition assignment; if so, statement regarding how the blinding was accomplished and how it was assessed.
Unit of Analysis 10 Description of the smallest unit that is being analyzed to assess intervention effects (e.g., individual, group, or community) If the unit of analysis differs from the unit of assignment, the analytical method used to account for this (e.g., adjusting the standard error estimates by the design effect or using multilevel analysis) Statistical Methods

11
Statistical methods used to compare study groups for primary methods outcome(s), including complex methods of correlated data Statistical methods used for additional analyses, such as a subgroup analyses and adjusted analysis Methods for imputing missing data, if used Statistical software or programs used

Participant flow 12
Flow of participants through each stage of the study: enrollment, assignment, allocation, and intervention exposure, follow-up, analysis (a diagram is strongly recommended) o Enrollment: the numbers of participants screened for eligibility, found to be eligible or not eligible, declined to be enrolled, and enrolled in the study o Assignment: the numbers of participants assigned to a study condition o Allocation and intervention exposure: the number of participants assigned to each study condition and the number of participants who received each intervention o Follow-up: the number of participants who completed the followup or did not complete the follow-up (i.e., lost to follow-up), by study condition o Analysis: the number of participants included in or excluded from the main analysis, by study condition Description of protocol deviations from study as planned, along with reasons Recruitment 13 Dates defining the periods of recruitment and follow-up Baseline Data 14 Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of participants in each study condition Baseline characteristics for each study condition relevant to specific disease prevention research Baseline comparisons of those lost to follow-up and those retained, overall and by study condition Comparison between study population at baseline and target population of interest Baseline equivalence 15 Data on study group equivalence at baseline and statistical methods used to control for baseline differences Numbers analyzed 16 Number of participants (denominator) included in each analysis for each study condition, particularly when the denominators change for different outcomes; statement of the results in absolute numbers when feasible Indication of whether the analysis strategy was "intention to treat" or, if not, description of how non-compliers were treated in the analyses Outcomes and estimation 17 For each primary and secondary outcome, a summary of results for each estimation study condition, and the estimated effect size and a confidence interval to indicate the precision Inclusion of null and negative findings Inclusion of results from testing pre-specified causal pathways through which the intervention was intended to operate, if any Ancillary analyses 18 Summary of other analyses performed, including subgroup or restricted analyses, indicating which are pre-specified or exploratory Adverse events 19 Summary of all important adverse events or unintended effects in each study condition (including summary measures, effect size estimates, and confidence intervals)

Interpretation 20
Interpretation of the results, taking into account study hypotheses, sources of potential bias, imprecision of measures, multiplicative analyses, and other limitations or weaknesses of the study Discussion of results taking into account the mechanism by which the intervention was intended to work (causal pathways) or alternative mechanisms or explanations Discussion of the success of and barriers to implementing the intervention, fidelity of implementation Discussion of research, programmatic, or policy implications Generalizability 21 Generalizability (external validity) of the trial findings, taking into account the study population, the characteristics of the intervention, length of follow-up, incentives, compliance rates, specific sites/settings involved in the study, and other contextual issues Overall Evidence

22
General interpretation of the results in the context of current evidence and current theory