Experience with mouthguards and prevalence of orofacial injuries among field hockey players in Catalonia.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Orofacial injuries are a serious problem in field hockey. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of orofacial injuries in field hockey players in Catalonia, the frequency of mouthguard use, the types of mouthguards used and the degree of interference with oral function. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 325 field hockey players (28% women) from all age categories completed a questionnaire about orofacial injuries occurring during their sporting lives, including dental injuries, oral lacerations and episodes of acute temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain. The questionnaire also asked about the experience of using a mouthguard, the type of mouthguard used and any adverse effects of use. The degree of interference with oral function was compared by type of mouthguard (mouth-formed, custom-made and pre-fabricated mouthguards) using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Half of the players (50.2%) reported at least one orofacial injury during their sporting lives. The mean number of oral lacerations, TMD pain episodes and dental injuries were 1.59, 0.24 and 0.18, respectively. In total, 310 players (95.7%) had tried a mouthguard, and of these 269 (86.8%) and 283 (91.3%) still used a mouthguard habitually during training and competition, respectively. Only 11 players (3.5%) had tried all three types of mouthguards, and 71 players (22.9%) had tried two types of mouthguard. By type, 217 players (70.0%) had tried mouth-formed (boil-and-bite) mouthguards, 156 (50.3%) had tried custom-made mouthguards and 30 (9.7%) had tried pre-fabricated mouthguards. Custom-made mouthguards were rated as more comfortable than the mouth-formed type (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of orofacial injuries among field hockey players is relatively high. Most players habitually use a mouthguard during training and competition, typically preferring custom-made or a mouth-formed types. Custom-made mouthguards were considered the most comfortable.

Satisfaction of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis with an oral appliance for managing oral self-biting injuries and alterations in their masticatory system: A case-series study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: About 10% of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) are candidates for oral treatment specifically because of traumatic injuries in the lips, cheeks, or tongue due to self-biting. However, patients with ALS have a prevalence of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) similar to that in the general population. PURPOSE: The purpose of this case-series study was to determine the degree of satisfaction of patients with ALS with an oral appliance for managing oral self-biting lesions or symptoms related to TMDs. This study also assessed the degree of improvement of the chief complaint and the compliance with and adverse effects of this treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eleven patients with ALS who sought oral treatment because of oral self-biting or TMD-related symptoms were included. A custom complete-coverage acrylic resin device was fabricated and fitted to each participant. A follow-up visit was planned for 3 months after the placement of the oral appliance, at which point the patients would rate the degree of improvement or worsening of the chief complaint and their degree of satisfaction with the treatment. A 1-sample t test was used to assess whether the degree of improvement of the chief complaint was significant. RESULTS: Participants reported a mean of 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 38% to 84%) improvement of the chief complaint and a mean of 84% (95% CI 72% to 97%) satisfaction with the treatment. The mean rate of compliance was 62% (95% CI 40% to 84%) of the recommended time, and only a few adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with ALS were highly satisfied with the use of an oral appliance to manage oral self-biting or TMD-related symptoms. Adherence to this treatment was high, and no major adverse effects were observed.

Risk of orofacial injuries and mouthguard use in water polo players.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The incidence of orofacial injuries and the use of mouthguards in water polo players have not been well established. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of orofacial injuries in water polo players. Frequency of mouthguard use, the types of mouthguards used and the degree of interference with oral functions were also assessed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 347 water polo players completed a questionnaire about the orofacial injuries suffered in the 2015-2016 season and the experience of using a mouthguard, such as the type of mouthguard used and the degree of interference with oral functions. RESULTS: In the 2015-2016 season, 57.9% of the players reported at least one orofacial injury, with mean numbers of 2.7 oral lacerations, 0.4 episodes of temporomandibular pain and 0.06 dental injuries. Among the 35 players (10.1%) who had tried a mouthguard, only four (1.2%) used it habitually. Some players had tried more than one type of mouthguard; 26 had tried the mouth-formed type; 11 the custom-made type; and 7 the prefabricated mouthguard. Custom-made mouthguards were rated as more comfortable than the mouth-formed type (P < 0.05). The main disadvantages of mouth-formed mouthguards were interferences with speaking, breathing and swallowing. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of orofacial injuries in water polo players is high. Although some players had tried a mouthguard, mainly the mouth-formed type, most of them do not wear them routinely for training and competition.

Alterations in the Masticatory System in Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.

AIMS: To determine the effect of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) on aspects of masticatory function and to assess the relationship between ALS and the prevalence of traumatic mucosal lesions caused by oral self-injury. METHODS: A total of 153 ALS patients and 23 control subjects participated in this cross-sectional study. Clinical characteristics including site of onset, medication, type of feeding, and use of noninvasive mechanical ventilation were recorded. The Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) protocol and a specific questionnaire to assess aspects of masticatory dysfunction and frequency of self-injury of the oral mucosa were applied to all participants. Maximum mandibular range of motion, maximum bite force, and maximum finger-thumb grip force were determined and tested with Mann Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, or chi-square tests. P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Maximum unassisted and assisted mouth opening, protrusion, left laterotrusion, and finger-thumb grip force were significantly reduced in both spinal- (n = 102) and bulbar-onset (n = 40) patients compared to the control group; however, bite force was reduced only in bulbar-onset patients. ALS patients with tube feeding (n = 16) had the greatest reduction in maximum bite force and mandibular opening. There was no relationship between TMD and ALS. Oral self-injury due to biting was more frequent in the ALS group (29.9%) than in the control group (8.7%) and in the bulbar-onset group (55.0%) compared to the spinal- (20.8%) and respiratory-onset (18.2%) groups. Of the ALS patients in the study, 10% sought dental treatment related to the condition. CONCLUSION: The ALS patients in this study had a reduction in finger-thumb grip force that was twice as great as the reduction in bite force. The maximum range of mandibular movement was also reduced, especially in bulbar-onset patients. ALS patients did not have a higher prevalence of TMD but did have more traumatic mucosal injury than controls. The dentist should be an integral part of the multidisciplinary team to manage ALS patients.