Objective:To explore the new mode of screening and intervention for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in civil servants and its influencing factors.Methods:From September to December 2017, 1 241 civil servants who underwent annual physical examination in the outpatient department of a civil servant unit in Guangdong province were enrolled. They were screened for high-risk patients with OSA by Berlin questionnaire, and then those high-risk patients would receive type 3 home sleep testing (HST). Patients diagnosed with OSA were given free continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) intervention and follow-up. The HST acceptance of high-risk OSA patients, OSA prevalence, CPAP initial treatment response rate and adherence trend and influencing factors were analyzed among the civil servants.Results:A total of 1036 civil servants completed the Berlin Questionnaire screening, of which 22.0% (228/1 036) were positive for the Berlin Questionnaire and were considered to be at high risk for OSA. A total of 228 high-risk OSA patients underwent free HST screening, and 32.5% (74/228) refused sleep monitoring. 154 people received sleep monitoring, 103 people were eventually diagnosed with OSA, of which 41 were mild (40.2%), 35 were moderate (33.3%), and 27 were severe (26.5%). The estimated prevalence of OSA among civil servants was 9.9% (103/1 036). All OSA patients were provided with free auto-CPAP treatment, and only 55.3% (57/103) received initial CPAP treatment. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the CPAP treatment response rate was positively correlated with the severity of OSA ( OR=5.65, 95% CI: 1.007―31.693); it was negatively correlated with the general health status score of the 36-Item Short Form of the Medical Outcomes Survey (SF-36, OR=0.968, 95% CI: 0.938―0.998).Self-determined behavioral interventions and self-perceptions that treatment not needed were the reasons for not receiving treatment.In the first week of initial CPAP treatment follow-up, 70.2% (40/57) patients had good adherence ≥4 h/night, and the median adherence was 5.0(4.0, 6.0) h/night. The adherence of 17 cases (29.8%) was less than 4 h/night, and the median adherence was 0 (0, 2.0) h/night. Univariate analysis showed that those with difficulty falling asleep, anxiety, depression, and adverse reactions to CPAP (nasal mask discomfort and suffocation) had worse adherence. The long-term adherence to CPAP treatment gradually declined, and by the 2-year follow-up period, only 22.0% of patients had good adherence. Conclusions:Even with free sleep screening and disease intervention mode, the acceptance of sleep monitoring and CPAP treatment is still low, and the short-term and long-term adherence to CPAP is poor. Epworth sleepiness Score, hypertension, and disease cognition affected the acceptance of sleep monitoring. Psycho psychological factors and adverse reactions to CPAP affect patient compliance.