Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1 1
SRBD subscale
A B
1 Introductio 3 Material-
n
The use of an oral appliance in adults
has been proven time and again that by
Method
38 children, 19 for test group (age 10.9 +
0.9; BMI 16.2 + 1.4 ), 19 for control group
(age 9.8 + 1.4; BMI 17.6 + 2.1), who fulfill the
advancing the mandible forward there is requirements shown on Table I, participated
a great improvement in sleep breathing on this study.
and overall health, the same principle is Two different questionnaires (ESS
applied by the FKO activator, even modified for children and SRBD sub-scale)
though its intended use is different, it were administered to both parents and
produces an added benefit in the sleep children.(Figure 1A,1B). Figure 1. Questionnaires used in this study. 1A, the ESS modified for
breathing patterns of children that children; 1B, The SRBD subscale.
Furthermore, oropharyngeal crowding was S N S PML
undergo this kind of therapy. assessed using the Mallampati Scale (MS). As
N
The aim of this study is to confirm if (Figure 4),group Group evaluate the
as to properly
Figure 2. Reference points used for Figure 3. Reference points used to
besides the intended inducement of changes that may happen when wearing the linear assessment of adenoids. assess adenoid and nasopharynx area.
development of the mandible the FKO activator (Figure
Skeletal
Class II
5). Skeletal
Class I
activator may also help improving
healthy sleep breathing patterns in Completion Completion
of screening of screening
children. questionnair questionnair 1. Forehead
es es
sensor
Two One 2. Chin sensor
successful successful
monitoring monitoring 3. Processing unit
of sleep of sleep
breathing breathing
Table I. Requirements for both groups to be included on Figure 4. The sleep monitor used for Figure 5 . FKO activator used in this
this study. this study. study.
4 Results
II III IV V
Score Test Group Control Group Measurements Test group Control group Mallampati Test group Control group Tonsillar Grade Test group Control group
threshold: Ptm-ad1 (mm) 14.3 12.8 scale
ESS <8 SD +0.60 +0.31 Class I 4 5 Grade o 1 0
SRBD < 0.33%
Ptm-ad2 (mm) 18.8 16.0
ESS 5 + 3.4 3.5 + 1.6 SD +0.97 +0.47
Class II 8 10 Grade 1 8 10
Adenoid area 210.1 167.8
SRBD (%) 0.20 + 0.14 0.16 + 0.1 (mm) +0.70 +0.84
SD Class III 4 2 Grade 2 9 7
Nasopharyngeal 324.1 345.5
SRBDs 0.76 0.71 area (mm) Class IV 3 2 Grade 3 1 2
Cronbach Alpha SD +0.99 +0.88
VI 6A 6B 6C
Variable Point Estimate 95% CI Oxygen Desaturation Index
(Odds Ratio) Indicators of Severity Respiratory Events * *
* *
* 2.25
12 * 18 * * *
*
2.2
* * 16
10
Mallampati Scale 1.5714 0.5020 to 4.9196 14 2.15
P =0.43 8 12
2.1
10
6
8 2.05
Tonsillar grade 0.9091 0.3129 to 2.6415 4 6
P=0.86 4
2
2
2 1.95
0 0
(n/h) RDI ARL CT % TOTAL EVENTS OBSTRUCTIVE CENTRAL MIXED 1.9
(n/h) (n/h)
Control Activator out Activator in Control Activator out Activator in Control Activator out Activator in
Results for the questionnaires used are shown on Table II. Adenoidal and nasopharyngeal size results can be seen on Table III.
Oropharyngeal crowding scores are presented on Table Iv, Table V and Table VI. Finally, outcomes from the sleep monitor are
displayed on Figures 6A-6C. *= P<0.05
Contact
3. Nuckton et al., Sleep, Vol. 29, No. 7, 2006
4. Grewal et al.,Contemp Clin Dent, Vol. 1(2);66-69, 2010
5. Major et al., AJODO, Vol. 130,No.6;700-708, 2006
6. Freitas et al., AJODO, Vol. 130, No.6; 742-745 , 2006
<Cynthia Concepcin Medina> 7. Capan et al., ERJVol. 46, No. 59, 2015