Trial reportBMC oral health2024
Clinical study of two mandibular advancement devices in the treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Polygraphic evaluation of the effects of functional orthodontic treatment with twin block and herbst appliances on sleep quality: a randomized clinical trial.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Trial
- The South Texas Oral Health Network Study of Practitioners' Approaches to Oral Appliance Therapy Titration for Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Their Impact on Patient Outcomes (PAOSA): Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Side effects of mandibular advancement devices in obstructive sleep apnea patients - observational results of a randomized controlled trial.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveA preliminary clinical evaluation of the efficacy, comfort, and adverse reactions of two mandibular advancement devices (MADs) in the treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA).
methodsForty patients with mild-to-severe OSA were recruited and randomly divided into two groups. They were treated with Shark-fin or Silensor MAD, respectively. Treatment efficacy was evaluated by home sleep apnea tests, the snoring scale, Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). A comfort scale questionnaire was applied. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), cephalometric radiography, and intraoral scanning were made before and after 3-month treatment to detect temporomandibular joints (TMJ), dental and skeletal changes. All data were assessed as normal distributed and analyzed by t test. The significance level was defined as α = 0.05.
resultsThe effective rate, defined as a decrease in Respiratory Event Index (REI) to less than 5 events per hour or a decrease of more than 50%, was 70% in the Shark-fin MAD group and 50% in the Silensor MAD group. REI, lowest oxygen saturation and maximum apnea and hypoventilation time were significantly improved in Shark-fin MAD group (P < 0.01), and the proportion of non-rapid eye movement (REM) sleep stage 3 was higher than before use (P < 0.05), while only REI and lowest oxygen saturation were significantly improved in Silensor MAD group (P < 0.05). The loudness of snoring was significantly decreased after one day using Shark-fin MAD (P < 0.05), and further decreased after one month (P < 0.01). Conversely, Silensor MAD exhibited inferior efficacy in mitigating snoring compared to Shark-fin MAD. Upon wearing the Shark-fin MAD, ESS were significantly improved after one month and three months (P < 0.05), and PSQI improved after three months (P < 0.05). Additionally, the Shark-fin MAD group had a significantly better comfort score compared to the Silensor MAD group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in TMJ, dental and skeletal structures in the two groups before and after treatment (P > 0.05).
conclusionBoth two MADs were effective in reducing REI and increasing lowest oxygen saturation on OSA patients, and Shark-fin MAD has better improvement effect and faster onset of action. In addition, Shark-fin MAD was superior to Silensor MAD in improving snoring loudness, daytime sleepiness, sleep quality and wearing comfort. There were no significant dental or skeletal changes, and no alterations in occlusion or temporomandibular joint function in the short term.
trial registrationClinical Trials.gov Registration ID ChiCTR2400086628. Registered 08/07/ 2024-Retrospectively registered, https://register. CLINICALTRIALS: gov .
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.