Seventeen RCTs (n=1,256 patients) were included in the review. The sample sizes ranged from 32 to 160. Six trials were determined to be of high quality. Publication bias was not statistically significant.
General quality of life score: Compared to comparator, continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) caused a statistically significant improvement in general quality of life scores for the Nottingham Health Profile (WMD 1.657, 95% CI -3.005 to -0.308) and in the Sleep Apnoea Quality of Life Index (WMD=0.900, 95% CI 0.625 to 1.175). However, there was no statistically significant difference in general quality of life scores for the other quality of life measures.
Individual domains and subgroup analysis: Compared to comparator, patients undergoing treatment with CPAP scored better for the Short Form 36 individual domains in: physical function (WMD 3.457, 95% CI 0.144 to 6.771); body pain (WMD 4.017, 95% CI -0.008 to 8.042); energy vitality (WMD 6.984, 95% CI 0.557 to 13.411); and physical component summary (WMD 2.040, 95% CI 0.045 to 4.035). Meta-regression analyses revealed that only study design and apnoea-hypopnoea index coefficient (AHI) were sources of statistically significant heterogeneity; this was for the physical problems domain (AHI coefficient -1.32, 95% CI -2.37 to -0.30; study design coefficient 52.39, 95% CI 2.55 to 102.22) and the body pain domains (AHI coefficient -0.698, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.01; study design coefficient 36.54, 95% CI 6.60 to 66.49).