Mild Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Children: What Is the Best Management Option?

TRIO Best PracticeTRIO Best Practice articles are brief, structured reviews designed to provide the busy clinician with a handy outline and reference for day-to-day clinical decision making. The ENTtoday summaries below include the Background and Best Practice sections of the original article. To view the complete Laryngoscope articles free of charge, visit Laryngoscope. May 2019

Background

Pediatric obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is characterized by upper airway obstruction, poor sleep, and daytime sequelae such as hyperactivity. Although controversy exists regarding the ideal evaluation for children with sleep-disordered breathing, the severity of OSA is currently determined by full-night polysomnogram (PSG). Mild OSA is defined by an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) > 1 and <5. The majority (approximately 85%) of healthy school-aged children evaluated by otolaryngologists for tonsil hypertrophy and obstructive symptoms have either primary snoring or nonsevere OSA.

The treatment of mild OSA in children is controversial. There is a lack of data on the natural history of mild sleep apnea. Furthermore, a poor correlation exists between quality of life (QOL) scores and OSA severity; mild OSA in children may have a significant impact on their general health and well-being. High-quality studies comparing observation, medical management, and surgery for mild pediatric OSA are just beginning to emerge. Many of these studies use varied measures to assess outcomes. Thus, it may be difficult for providers treating children with mild OSA to counsel parents on the optimal treatment for their child.

Best Practice

Multiple therapeutic options may be effective for treating mild pediatric OSA including observation, management with anti-inflammatory medications, and surgery (Table 1). Validated instruments that assess symptom burden and the impact of OSA on QOL may be useful in determining which treatment option is most appropriate for the child. Shared decision making between caregiver, child (when appropriate), and physician may be useful in developing a management strategy for mild OSA. Data on the sequelae of mild OSA in children, including the impact of obstruction on cardiovascular parameters and neurocognition, are lacking. Future research is needed to compare long-term outcomes for the different treatment options for mild OSA in children (Laryngoscope. 2018;128:2671–2672).

ENT Today

Professional Voice Care May Reduce Vocal Disorders in Children

The vocal training and regular examinations by otolaryngologists that children who sing in choirs receive may pay off beyond voice training to benefit their overall vocal health, according to data from a recently published study that showed voice disorders were less common in a cohort of children singing in a choir compared to children who did not (JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg [published online ahead of print March 14, 2019]. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2019.0066).

“These findings suggest that there is a negative association between singing in a children’s choir and the presence of voice disorders,” said lead author of the study, Pedro Clarós, MD, PhD, who is with the Clarós Otorhinolaryngology Clinic in Barcelona, Spain.

The prospective cohort study was conducted to more fully examine whether an association exists between the development of vocal disorders and children who sing in a choir. According to the study authors, examination of this association in prepubescent children is lacking. To fill that gap, investigators enrolled 1,495 children (aged 8 to 14 years) from four local schools in Barcelona, Spain between October 2016 and April 2018. Of the children enrolled, 752 sang in a children’s choir and 743 children did not. Children in the choirs sang for a mean time of 7.5 hours per week for 2.5 years.

All children underwent videolaryngoscopy followed by videostroboscopy to assess the effect of singing or not singing in a choir on voice disorders (primary outcome). The study also looked at voice symptom complaints using surveys and the GRBAS (grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain) scale measurements (secondary outcomes).

The study found 12 voice disorders that were more common among the children who did not sing compared to those who did (32.4% vs 15.6%), with both functional voice disorders and organic voice disorders occurring more frequently in the non-singing children than the singing children (20.2% vs. 9.4% and 12.2% and 6.1%, respectively). Voice complaints or dysphonia were also higher in the children who did not sing in choirs compared to those who did (28.9% vs 21.0%) as reported by both the children and their parents, teachers, and choir directors. Muscle tension dysphonia (MTD) accounted for the largest difference between the two groups overall (17.2% vs. 8.4%) followed by psychogenic dysphonia (3.0% vs. 1.1%) and vocal fold nodules (7.9% vs. 4.0%).

These findings suggest that professional voice care that includes speech therapists and frequent otorhinolaryngologic examinations may be an important intervention to prevent or reduce voice disorders in children who sing in choirs, according to Dr. Clarós.

He also underscored that similar interventions to promote good voice care are important for all children, including non-singing children, particularly given the influence of good voice care over the long term on both the personal and professional lives of people. “The importance of voice care is particularly salient in children because they do not control their behavior or voice as well as adults and therefore are more vulnerable to possible voice trauma,” he said. “We believe it is crucial to introduce the same solicitude for voice in non-singing children.”

ENT Today