Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Dental Research
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Free Full Text Free
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Data Supplement
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hoekema, A.
Right arrow Articles by de Bont, L.G.M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hoekema, A.
Right arrow Articles by de Bont, L.G.M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Clinical

Obstructive Sleep apnea Therapy

A. Hoekema1,*, B. Stegenga1, P.J. Wijkstra2, J.H. van der Hoeven3, A.F. Meinesz2 and L.G.M. de Bont1

1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery,
2 Department of Home Mechanical Ventilation, and
3 Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands

Correspondence: * corresponding author, a.hoekema{at}kchir.umcg.nl

In clinical practice, oral appliances are used primarily for obstructive sleep apnea patients who do not respond to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy. We hypothesized that an oral appliance is not inferior to CPAP in treating obstructive sleep apnea effectively. We randomly assigned 103 individuals to oral-appliance or CPAP therapy. Polysomnography after 8–12 weeks indicated that treatment was effective for 39 of 51 persons using the oral appliance (76.5%) and for 43 of 52 persons using CPAP (82.7%). For the difference in effectiveness, a 95% two-sided confidence interval was calculated. Non-inferiority of oral-appliance therapy was considered to be established when the lower boundary of this interval exceeded –25%. The lower boundary of the confidence interval was –21.7%, indicating that oral-appliance therapy was not inferior to CPAP for effective treatment of obstructive sleep apnea. However, subgroup analysis revealed that oral-appliance therapy was less effective in individuals with severe disease (apnea-hypopnea index > 30). Since these people could be at particular cardiovascular risk, primary oral-appliance therapy appears to be supported only for those with non-severe apnea.

Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval • CPAP = continuous positive airway pressure.

Key Words: sleep apnea syndromes • orthodontic appliances • positive-pressure ventilation • treatment outcome • CPAP therapy

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 87, No. 9, 882-887 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/154405910808700917
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?