The impact of mouthguards usage on aerobic capacity of athletes

Abstract

A B S T R AC TIntroduction: The use of intraoral mouthguards is the basic method of preventing injuries of the stomato gnathic system while practicing extreme, contact, team and recreational sports. However, the presence of a protec tive splint in the mouth, especially during exercise, when increased oxygen uptake is needed, may adversely affect the level of blood oxygenation. It is also necessary to compare different types of splint as they differ in retention, size and comfort of usage. Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of different intraoral mouthguard types for the cardio respiratory capacity of athletes. Material and methods: Thirty athletes aged 2037, testing a total of 120 intraoral mouthguards of different typestwo custommade mouthguards prepared and two "boil and bite" splints adapted -took part in the study, in which cardiorespiratory capacity was compared using CRF, IF, METs and Watt indicators, based on tests conducted on the Fitmate device correlated with a stationary exercise bike. Results: The analysis of variance showed no differences between the compared parameters regardless of the tested mouthguard. The use of intraoral mouthguards during exercise does not affect the cardiorespiratory endurance of athletes. Conclusions: Mouthguards users, trainers and doctors should be informed about the lack of a negative impact of its usage during training and competition on cardiorespiratory endurance.

Sports mouthguard overview: Materials, fabrication techniques, existing standards, and future research needs

“…to not impair overall sports activities and/or performance, [29][30][31] including negligible effects on cardiorespiratory endurance and not impairing ventilatory function. [32][33][34] Some reports suggest that particular SM designs improve physical performance function 27,[35][36][37] and aerobic capacity. 26,38 However, published research overall suggests that SM do not provide superior improvement in general fitness parameters.…”

“…Non‐compliance with the use of Type 1 and Type 2 SM has been reported 26 due to discomfort, interfering with communication, perceived breathing difficulties, 27,28 and negatively affecting exercise capacity 21 . Conversely, well‐adapted Type 3 SM have been reported to not impair overall sports activities and/or performance, 29–31 including negligible effects on cardiorespiratory endurance and not impairing ventilatory function 32–34 . Some reports suggest that particular SM designs improve physical performance function 27,35–37 and aerobic capacity 26,38 .…”