 The investigators proposed prospective, randomized intervention will compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of REVAMP management of Veterans with OSA to in-person care. Aim 1 will determine if management with REVAMP is clinically non-inferior to in-person care in terms of improvement in functional outcomes and APAP adherence. Non-inferiority of clinical effectiveness following 3 months of APAP treatment will be expressed in terms of improvement in the score of the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire FOSQ-10, the investigators primary outcome measure. Adherence to APAP will be objectively monitored by wireless transmission of data from the participants home unit. In Aim 2, patient preference, medical service use and cost will be collected every 3 months for the entire observation period to compare cost effectiveness of the two managements. Preference will be assessed by the SF-6D,6 and the EQ-5D.7, 8 Differences in the ratio of cost and quality-adjusted life years saved by REVAMP compared to in-person management will test the hypothesis that REVAMP management will have lower cost and equivalent outcomes. The results of Aims 1 and 2 will provide evidence to support widespread dissemination of REVAMP. Formative evaluation in Aim 3 will use qualitative targeted phone interviews and quantitative measures attrition, work alliance, and patient satisfaction to inform clinicians, administrators and other stakeholders how to implement this innovative chronic disease pathway. 