ArticleBritish dental journal2019
The 'lifespan' of mandibular repositioning appliances.
Article in British dental journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of an anti-snoring device featuring a Ni-Ti alloy elastic linkage in a simulated clinical environment.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Mandibular advancement device use in obstructive sleep apnea: ORCADES study 5-year follow-up data.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Mandibular replacement appliances (MRAs) can be used in the treatment of snoring, mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnoea and as a second-line treatment where continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) fails. There is currently a paucity of evidence as to how long these appliances last.Aims Assess the replacement rate for MRAs using this as a proxy for lifespan; estimate the period prevalence of temporomandibular joint disorder (TMJD) and bruxism in the study population.Methods Prospective observational study as part of service evaluation. Data from consecutive patients seeking a replacement MRA were collected over a three-month period, yielding a sample of 60. The mean time between the provision of appliances was calculated in months. Reasons for replacement were sought, collated and categorised. Patients were asked to report any TMJD symptoms and bruxing.Results The mean replacement rate was 36.7 months. The main reasons for replacement were: device condition; fit and reduced effectiveness; and other minor reasons reported. Period prevalence of TMJD was 6.7%; bruxism was reported in 5% of patients.Conclusions A 'lifespan' of ust over three years for thermoplastic MRAs is estimated. The main reasons for replacement were: condition, poor fit and reduced effectiveness. MRAs do not appear to increase the frequency of TMJD and bruxism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.