Abstract
Objectives
This study aimed to review the funding policies of clinical commissioning groups for treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea in England.
Methods
Published policies from a randomly selected sample of 60 out of 190 clinical commissioning groups were reviewed.
Results
Continuous positive airway pressure was funded based on a clinical assessment or according to criteria that were in line with national guidelines in most clinical commissioning groups (49 of 60), with 11 clinical commissioning groups offering no policy. Mandibular advancement devices, tonsillectomy and nasal surgery were funded based on a clinical assessment or certain criteria in 16, 25 and 16 clinical commissioning groups, respectively. In contrast, only one clinical commissioning group provided funding for soft palate, tongue base or mandibular surgery. Hypoglossal nerve stimulation was not mentioned in any clinical commissioning group's policy.
Conclusion
Although most clinical commissioning groups provide funding for the use of continuous positive airway pressure, the availability of funding for other obstructive sleep apnoea treatment modalities is heterogeneous, leaving continuous positive airway pressure intolerant patients with limited therapeutic options in some regions.
Mandibular advancement devices vs nasal-continuous positive airway pressure in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea.
Systematic review and meta-analysis
