Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2025
Jaw Exercise Versus Jaw & Posture Exercise Therapies in Comparison to Occlusal Splint Effectiveness in Probable Sleep Bruxism: A Randomised Controlled Study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karabicak Gul Oznur, Alkan Demetoğlu Göknil, Ozkan Gokhan, Gunaydin Gurkan, Önal Aykar Sercan, Günaydın Özge Ece
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Despite various treatment approaches for bruxism, there is limited evidence comparing exercise therapy and occlusal splints, highlighting the importance of this study.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of a 6-week jaw exercise (JE) program with combined jaw and posture exercises (JP) on pain and mandibular motion in patients with probable sleep bruxism. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the effects of the interventions on oral parafunctions, posture, and sleep quality.
METHODS: Sixty-three patients with probable sleep bruxism were randomly assigned to JE, JP, or Occlusal Splints (OS) groups at the University Hospital. Pain levels were assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS), and the maximum oral opening was measured using a calliper. Secondary outcomes included oral parafunctions, evaluated via the Oral Behaviours Checklist, and posture, assessed using craniovertebral and craniohorizontal angles. Assessments were performed at baseline, post-treatment (6th week), and 12th week follow-up. Data were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA (Group × Time).
RESULTS: All groups demonstrated significant pain reductions (p < 0.05), but none of the groups showed superiority (p > 0.05). Mouth opening improved significantly only in the JE group (p < 0.05), with no intergroup differences (p > 0.05). Improvements in oral parafunctions occurred in the JE and JP groups (p < 0.05), but the differences between the groups were not significant (p > 0.05). No significant changes were observed in the craniovertebral or craniohorizontal angles (p > 0.05). No adverse events were observed in any intervention group.
CONCLUSION: This trial found no substantial superiority between interventions. Exercise-based therapies (JE and JP) and OS similarly improved pain, mouth opening, and oral parafunctions in bruxism patients, with no postural changes. Further studies should explore long-term effects in diverse populations.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05555628.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of a 6-week jaw exercise (JE) program with combined jaw and posture exercises (JP) on pain and mandibular motion in patients with probable sleep bruxism. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the effects of the interventions on oral parafunctions, posture, and sleep quality.
METHODS: Sixty-three patients with probable sleep bruxism were randomly assigned to JE, JP, or Occlusal Splints (OS) groups at the University Hospital. Pain levels were assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS), and the maximum oral opening was measured using a calliper. Secondary outcomes included oral parafunctions, evaluated via the Oral Behaviours Checklist, and posture, assessed using craniovertebral and craniohorizontal angles. Assessments were performed at baseline, post-treatment (6th week), and 12th week follow-up. Data were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA (Group × Time).
RESULTS: All groups demonstrated significant pain reductions (p < 0.05), but none of the groups showed superiority (p > 0.05). Mouth opening improved significantly only in the JE group (p < 0.05), with no intergroup differences (p > 0.05). Improvements in oral parafunctions occurred in the JE and JP groups (p < 0.05), but the differences between the groups were not significant (p > 0.05). No significant changes were observed in the craniovertebral or craniohorizontal angles (p > 0.05). No adverse events were observed in any intervention group.
CONCLUSION: This trial found no substantial superiority between interventions. Exercise-based therapies (JE and JP) and OS similarly improved pain, mouth opening, and oral parafunctions in bruxism patients, with no postural changes. Further studies should explore long-term effects in diverse populations.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05555628.