Effect of contingent vibratory stimulus via an oral appliance on sleep bruxism after the splint adaptation period
Effect of contingent vibratory stimulus via an oral appliance on sleep bruxism after the splint adaptation period
复制标题
夹板适应期后通过口腔矫治器进行的偶然振动刺激对睡眠磨牙症的影响
DOI：
10.1111/joor.13182
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Baba Kazuyoshi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nakazato Yukari;Takaba Masayuki;Abe Yuka;Nakamura Hirotaka;Ohara Hironobu;Suganuma Takeshi;Clark Glenn T.;Baba Kazuyoshi
背景研究表明，由特殊设计的口腔矫治器（oral appliance，OA）施加的偶然振动反馈刺激可以有效地减少睡眠磨牙症（sleep bruxism，SB）。然而，OA分娩后立即发生的OA抑制作用可能混淆了这一发现。目的本研究旨在阐明OA适应期后振动刺激对SB的影响，此时其抑制作用减弱。方法14名“明确”SB患者入组。使用基于力的磨牙症检测系统触发连接至OA的振动器。在家中使用便携式多导睡眠描记仪记录睡眠期间的咬肌肌电活动。在使用无振动刺激的OA 16个晚上（适应期）后，每隔半小时施加一次间歇性振动刺激，持续4个晚上（干预期）。肌电图活动超过最大自主收缩的10%被认为是SB发作。分别计算有刺激和无刺激的睡眠时间段每小时SB发作的次数和总持续时间，并对四个干预夜晚进行平均。刺激对这两个变量的影响进行了evaluated.ResultsThe没有刺激的会话的数量和总持续时间分别为5.2集/小时和35.3秒/小时。这些值显着下降到3.9次/小时和15.1秒/小时（p<0.05）的会议与振动stimulation.ConclusionContingent振动刺激通过OA可能是有效的SB的管理，即使在适应OA。
BackgroundContingent vibratory feedback stimuli applied by a specially designed oral appliance (OA) have been reported to be effective in reducing sleep bruxism (SB). However, the inhibitory effects of the OA, which occur immediately after OA delivery, may have confounded this finding.ObjectiveThis study sought to shed light on the effects of vibratory stimuli on SB after the OA adaptation period, when its inhibitory effects are diminished.MethodsFourteen ‘definite’ SB patients were enrolled. A force‐based bruxism detection system was utilised to trigger a vibrator attached to the OA. Masseter electromyographic activity during sleep was recorded at home using portable polysomnography. After using the OA without vibratory stimulus for 16 nights (adaptation period), intermittent vibratory stimuli were applied every other half‐hour for four nights (intervention period). Electromyographic activity over 10% of the maximum voluntary contraction was regarded as a SB episode. The number and the total duration of SB episodes per hour of sleep were calculated for the sessions with and without stimuli separately and averaged for four intervention nights. The effects of stimuli on these two variables were evaluated.ResultsThe number and the total duration of the sessions without stimuli were 5.2 episodes/h and 35.3 s/h, respectively. These values significantly decreased to 3.9 episodes/h and 15.1 s/h (p< .05) for the sessions with vibratory stimuli.ConclusionContingent vibratory stimulus via an OA may be effective for the management of SB even after adaptation to OA.