Trial reportDental press journal of orthodontics2026
Effectiveness of a fully digital mandibular advancement appliance compared with CPAP in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea.
Trial report in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClinicians often face the decision of recommending Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) or a Mandibular Advancement Appliance (MAA) for Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA).
objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a fully digital workflow MAA and compare its outcomes with CPAP therapy.
methodsTwenty adults with OSA confirmed by Type I polysomnography (AHI < 50 events/hour), non-adherent to CPAP, were enrolled in a crossover clinical study. After MAA titration (50% and 75% of maximum protrusion), participants underwent home sleep testing under three conditions: no treatment, CPAP, and MAA. Outcomes included oxygen desaturation index (ODI), snoring score, oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO₂), hypoxic burden, and mean heart rate. Treatment-induced changes (Δ = treatment - no treatment) were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (α = 5%).
resultsBoth therapies significantly reduced ODI and snoring, compared to baseline. Median ODI decreased from 13.55 events/hour (untreated) to 6.05 with MAA and 5.30 with CPAP. No statistically significant differences were found between MAA and CPAP for ΔODI (p = 0.401), snoring (p = 0.103), hypoxic burden (p = 0.165), or heart rate (p = 0.824). A significant difference in SpO₂ was observed (p = 0.003), favoring CPAP; however, the difference was small.
conclusionsThe fully digital MAA was effective in reducing oxygen desaturation, snoring, and hypoxic burden, showing no clinically meaningful difference compared with CPAP, supporting its use as a viable therapeutic alternative for OSA.
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.