2015
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12401
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Snoring and Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Objective Efficacy and Impact of a Chairside Fabricated Mandibular Advancement Device

Abstract: This custom-fitted MAD improved respiratory and somnolence parameters, with response rates similar to those published in the literature with other devices.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
7
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
7
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…MAD showed their efficacy in a number of studies [19], [20], [21], [22] but there are few specialists who are able to manage this therapeutic alternative. For this reason, there is not enough clinical evidence about their results in several populations [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MAD showed their efficacy in a number of studies [19], [20], [21], [22] but there are few specialists who are able to manage this therapeutic alternative. For this reason, there is not enough clinical evidence about their results in several populations [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Titration and follow-up evaluations were conducted along the same guidelines for the thermoplastic MAD and the custom-made device. Clearly, this adds to the process length but ensures suitable fitting and retention, and consequently proper tolerance and efficacy of the appliance, as already shown with other devices [25,26].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Common side effects of MAD therapy include mucosal dryness, hyper salivation, tooth discomfort, temporal mandibular joint and muscle pain, tooth movement and self-reported occlusal changes [11,12,30]. Although open trials with thermoplastic devices showed mild side effects [25,31,32], most comparative trials found that tolerance and overnight retention were lower with thermoplastic than custom-made devices [13,23,24,27]. Most patients expressed preference for the custom-made device in cross-over trials [13,24].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The efficacy of different types of custom MRAs has been studied, and the results show no clear advantage between the appliances; however, custom‐made appliances provide superior treatment over prefabricated designs . MRAs require good retention from one or two arches and sufficient advancement of the mandible .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%