Sleep is essential and important for growth, development, learning and well-being in children and adolescents. Symptoms of sleep problems in schoolchildren can be bedtime resistance, difficulty initiating sleep because of anxiety, daytime sleepiness and nocturnal enuresis.Sleep problems can be caused by sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) such as obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), insufficient sleep, delayed sleep-wake phase disorder and/or anxiety disorders. [1][2][3] The prevalence of OSA in children and adolescents is 1-5%-but may be underdiagnosed. [4][5][6] OSA is caused by central, sleep-induced neuromuscular hypotonia, in conjunction with decreased space in

Aim To ascertain and illustrate specific clinical dento‐craniofacial characteristics associated with sleep‐disordered breathing (SDB) in non‐syndromic children. Methods Narrative review of literature on SDB, dental occlusion and craniofacial morphology retrieved through online literature database search for these terms. The review focused on clinical examples and graphical illustrations in order to ascertain the association between dento‐craniofacial characteristics and SDB. Only publications concerning healthy non‐syndromic children without any somatic or psychological diagnosis were included. Results Dento‐craniofacial characteristics such as anterior open bite, large overjet, cross bite and facial appearance such as convex profile due to mandibular retrognathia and inclination, narrow and high palate can predispose to SDB in non‐syndromic children. Furthermore, extended head posture, mouth breathing and general adenoidal face may be symptoms or predisposing factors to SDB in non‐syndromic children. Conclusion Dento‐craniofacial characteristics as anterior open bite, large overjet due to mandibular retrognathia, cross bite, and narrow and high palate can predispose to SDB in non‐syndromic children. Facial characteristics predisposing to SDB can be a convex facial profile, extended head posture, mouth breathing and general adenoidal face. Interdisciplinary collaboration between medical doctors and dentists can prove valuable in diagnostics, prevention and treatment of SDB in non‐syndromic children.

Objectives:The aim of this cross-sectional study was to examine the method error and reliability of acoustic pharyngometry and rhinometry in children and adolescents and to describe the feasibility of these methods in a young population. Material and Methods:The study sample included 35 healthy subjects in the age of 9 to 14 years. The subjects were randomly recruited for the present project in the period from June 2021 to February 2022. Repeated measurements of the upper airway dimensions in standing mirror position were performed by the use of Acoustic Pharyngometer and Rhinometer. Volume (cm 3 ), calculated resistance (cm H 2 O/L/min), mean area (cm 2 ), minimum cross-sectional area (MCA, cm 2 ) and distance to MCA (cm) were examined. Method errors and reliability coefficients were evaluated using Dahlberg's formula and the Houston reliability coefficient. The feasibility of the methods were analysed using paired t-test and estimated by difference in drop-out rates. Results: No systematic error exhibited in the repeated measurements except volume in the left nostril (P = 0.017). The method errors of the acoustic pharyngometry and rhinometry were betweeen 0.0002 to 0.069 and 0.001 to 0.082 respectively. The Houston reliability coefficient for both methods were between 0.952 to 0.999. The acoustic pharyngometry was significantly more feasible compared to rhinometry (P < 0.001). Conclusions:The study shows that acoustic pharyngometry and rhinometry in the standing mirror position are reliable methods, with acoustic pharyngometry being even more feasible than rhinometry, which is why it is recommended to practice the methods with children and ensure reliability of results before registering measurements.

No abstract