Trial reportTrials2023
Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of customized maxillary oral appliance with mandibular advancement appliance as a treatment modality for moderate obstructive sleep apnea patients-a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Western University Protocol for Obstructive Sleep Apnea.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Maxillary appliances for the treatment of moderate obstructive sleep apnea: adjustability and mechanisms.Trials · 2025Article
- Article
- Diagnostic and Therapeutic Indications of Different Types of Mandibular Advancement Design for Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome: Indications from Literature Review and Case Descriptions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Indications for Dental Specialists for Treating Obstructive Sleep Apnea with Mandibular Advancement Devices: A Narrative Review.International journal of dentistry · 2024Review
- Assessment of emotional stress among patients suffering from obstructive sleep apnea: A cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is quite common among the adult population, according to recent epidemiological studies. The most frequently suggested alternate treatment for mild to moderate OSA is oral appliances (OA). The purpose of the present study was to assess as well as compare the effectiveness of custom-made maxillary oral appliances against mandibular advancement appliances in the care of individuals suffering from moderate obstructive sleep apnea.
methodsA prospective interventional research was carried out with 40 participants. Polysomnography (PSG) was done and the participants with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) >15-30 were involved in the research. Study participants were randomly split up into two test groups: group I was the "Control Group" (group treated with a mandibular advancement device (MAD), n=20), while group II was exposed to a "customized maxillary oral appliance" (CMOA, n=20). Both groups had reference measures for AHI, blood oxygen saturation (SpO2), oro-nasal airflow via respiratory disturbance index (RDI), and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). Appliances were fabricated and delivered to the respective study group participants. PSG was again conducted after a period of 1 and 3 months of appliance delivery and re-evaluation was done for all the parameters and was compared with reference measurements. The facts were analyzed using descriptive and analytical statistical methods. The statistical program utilized in the study was "SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) Version 20.1." After 1 and 3 months, the statistical significance between the two study groups was assessed at P<0.05.
resultsThe analysis of mean AHI, SPO2, RDI, and ESS for both test groups manifested statistically significant measures (P<0.001). The study results revealed a statistically significant depletion in mean AHI scores, improvement in mean SPO2 scores, and reduction in mean RDI scores and ESS scores when compared with reference measurements to 1 month, 1 to 3 months, and between reference measurements and 3 months.
conclusionThe CMOA was effective in managing moderate OSA and has great therapeutic potential. It can be an option for the MAD for treating patients suffering from moderate obstructive sleep apnea.
trial registrationThe study was registered under Clinical Trials Registry-India and the registration number is CTRI/2020/07/026936 . Registered on 31 July 2020.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.