Orofacial myofunctional characteristics of oral and oronasal breathers

Abstract

Purpose: to compare the variables of the Orofacial Evaluation with Scores Protocol between nasal, oral and oronasal breathers. Methods: a sample consisting of three distinct groups subdivided into nasal, oral and oronasal breathers, both genders, with ages ranging from 6 to 12 years. The characteristics of the orofacial musculature were measured using the protocol. Results: there was a significant difference between oral and oronasal breathers compared to nasal ones (p=0.0007) in specific variables such as palatal conformation (p=0.0073); mobility of tongue (p: 0.0111) and lip (p=0.0451), with a significant difference between the groups evaluated, also observed for the total protocol score (p=0.0007) and posture (p: 0.0073), where the nasal respirators differ from the oral and oronasal ones, the latter being similar. As for lip (p=0.0451) and tongue (p=0.0111) mobility, the groups studied presented different results among themselves. Conclusion: when comparing the groups of oral and oronasal breathers, in relation to the variables of the AMIOFE protocol, no statistically significant difference was seen between these two groups, which allows the conclusion that the orofacial myofunctional behavior between oral and oronasal breathers in this research, was similar.

Towards a better diagnosis of mouth breathing: validity and reliability of a protocol for assessing the awake breathing pattern in preschool children

“…The results of this study allow us to consider OB as a mild form of MB but not as a distinct pattern. This postulate is supported by some authors ( 12 , 14 , 19 , 23 ) . Yet, the high variability found in this study within the MB group suggest that the breathing pattern is best described as a general and predominant trend ( 16 , 17 ) and that MB should be viewed as a continuum within which exclusive mouth breathing is rare ( 12 ) .…”

Influence of Breathing Modes and Facial Growth Patterns on Electromyographic Fatigue of Masticatory Muscles in Children

“…21 The diminished muscle behavior in MB may be caused by the hypofunctioning of the masticatory muscles of these subjects, especially the mandibular elevators, as the mouth remains open for breathing. 5,8 The masticatory preference pattern and changed head posture of MBs can also interfere with the asymmetry of the musculature, though with no defined pattern. 16,40 Thus, it was hypothesized that the possible asymmetry in the masticatory muscles of this population can also interfere with muscle fatiguewhich, however, was not observed.…”

“…These changes include mandible posture and occlusal changes and influences on the facial growth pattern. [5][6][7][8][9] Some studies have shown that MBs typically have an elongated face, 5 while others have found mesofacial 10,11 and brachyfacial growth patterns 12 as a characteristic of this population. All these imbalances may potentialize speech, 13 swallowing, 2,9 and mastication changes.…”

“…These changes include mandible posture and occlusal changes and influences on the facial growth pattern. 5 6 7 8 9 …”

Associação entre os aspectos da avaliação clínica da língua realizada em crianças

“…Qualitative evaluation of the tongue, although a routine in SLP practice, especially in the field of orofacial motricity, is still little studied, mainly regarding the performance of children (16) . Different studies addressing specific tongue tasks such as force (26) , mobility (27) , praxis (14,28,29) , and frenulum (22) have been conducted with individuals with varied clinical conditions. However, the present study innovates by investigating the association between the different tasks of tongue assessment.…”