INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is common in Singapore, with moderate to severe OSA affecting around 30% of residents. These consensus statements aim to provide scientifically grounded recommendations for the management of OSA, standar-dise the management of OSA in Singapore and promote multidisciplinary collaboration. METHOD: An expert panel, which was convened in 2024, identified several areas of OSA management that require guidance. The expert panel reviewed the current literature and developed consensus statements, which were later independently voted on using a 3-point Likert scale (agree, neutral or disagree). Consensus (total ratings of agree and neutral) was set a priori at ≥80% agreement. Any statement not reaching consensus was excluded. RESULTS: The final consensus included 49 statements that provide guidance on the screening, diagnosis and management of adults with OSA. Additionally, 23 statements on the screening, diagnosis and management of paediatric OSA achieved consensus. These 72 consensus statements considered not only the latest clinical evidence but also the benefits and harms, resource implications, feasibility, acceptability and equity impact of the recommendations. CONCLUSION The statements presented in this paper aim to guide clinicians based on the most updated evidence and collective expert opinion from sleep specialists in Singapore. These recommendations should augment clinical judgement rather than replace it. Management decisions should be individualised, taking into account the patient's clinical characteristics, as well as patient and caregiver concerns and preferences.
Humans ; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/diagnosis* ; Singapore ; Consensus ; Adult

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of previous studies on minimally invasive scoliosis surgery (MISS) in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Some data on MISS in AIS compared with conventional open scoliosis surgery (COSS) are conflicting. A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library, including studies reporting outcomes for MISS in AIS. The meta-analysis compared the operative, radiological, and clinical outcomes and complications between MISS and COSS in patients with AIS. Of the 208 records identified, 15 nonrandomized studies with 1,369 patients (reviews and case reports are excluded) were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The mean scale was 6.1, and eight of the 15 included studies showed satisfactory quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. For operative outcomes, MISS had significant benefits in terms of estimated blood loss (standard mean difference [SMD], -1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.94 to -0.91) and hospitalization days (SMD, -2.99; 95% CI, -4.45 to -1.53) compared with COSS. However, COSS showed significantly favorable outcomes for operative times (SMD, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.92–2.51). No significant differences were observed in radiological outcomes, including Cobb’s angle of the main curve and thoracic kyphosis. For clinical outcomes, MISS showed significant benefits on the visual analog scale score (SMD, -0.91; 95% CI, -1.36 to -0.47). The overall complication rates of MISS were similar to those of COSS (SMD, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.61–1.52). MISS using the posterior approach provides equivalent radiological and clinical outcomes and complication rates compared with COSS. Considering the lower estimated blood loss, shorter hospitalization days, and longer operative times in MISS, COSS is still the mainstay of surgical treatment in AIS; however, MISS using the posterior approach is also one of the surgical options of choice in the case of moderate AIS.

Objectives: This study aimed to present the Asia-Pacific consensus on long-term and sequential therapy for osteoporosis, offering evidence-based recommendations for the effective management of this chronic condition.The primary focus is on achieving optimal fracture prevention through a comprehensive, individualized approach. Methods: A panel of experts convened to develop consensus statements by synthesizing the current literature and leveraging clinical expertise. The review encompassed long-term anti-osteoporosis medication goals, first-line treatments for individuals at very high fracture risk, and the strategic integration of anabolic and anti resorptive agents in sequential therapy approaches. Results: The panelists reached a consensus on 12 statements. Key recommendations included advocating for anabolic agents as the first-line treatment for individuals at very high fracture risk and transitioning to anti resorptive agents following the completion of anabolic therapy. Anabolic therapy remains an option for in dividuals experiencing new fractures or persistent high fracture risk despite antiresorptive treatment. In cases of inadequate response, the consensus recommended considering a switch to more potent medications. The consensus also addressed the management of medication-related complications, proposing alternatives instead of discontinuation of treatment. Conclusions This consensus provides a comprehensive, cost-effective strategy for fracture prevention with an emphasis on shared decision-making and the incorporation of country-specific case management systems, such as fracture liaison services. It serves as a valuable guide for healthcare professionals in the Asia-Pacific region, contributing to the ongoing evolution of osteoporosis management.

Methods: All adult patients diagnosed with spinal spondylosis and migraine treated with CGRP inhibitors at a single academic institution between 2017 and 2020 were retrospectively identified. Patient demographic and medical data, follow-up duration, migraine severity and frequency, spinal pain, functional status, and mobility before and after the administration of CGRP inhibitors were collected. Paired univariate analysis was conducted to determine significant changes in spinal pain, headache severity, and headache frequency before and after the administration of CGRP inhibitors. The correlation between changes in the spinal pain score and functional or mobility improvement was assessed with Spearman’s rho. Results: In total, 56 patients were included. The mean follow-up time after the administration of CGRP inhibitors was 123 days for spinal pain visits and 129 days for migraine visits. Backeck pain decreased significantly (p <0.001) from 6.30 to 4.36 after starting CGRP inhibitor therapy for migraine control. As recorded in the spine follow-up notes, 25% of patients experienced a functional improvement in the activities of daily living, and 17.5% experienced mobility improvement while taking CGRP inhibitors. Change in back/ neck pain moderately correlated (ρ=−0.430) with functional improvement but was not correlated with mobility improvement (ρ=−0.052). Conclusions Patients taking CGRP inhibitors for chronic migraines with comorbid degenerative spinal conditions experienced significant off-target reduction of backeck pain.