Effects of vibratory feedback stimuli through an oral appliance on sleep bruxism: a 6-week intervention trial.

PURPOSE: Various biofeedback stimulation techniques of managing sleep bruxism (SB) have recently emerged; however, the effect of successive application of vibratory feedback stimulation has not been clarified. This study elucidated the effect of vibration feedback stimulation via an oral appliance (OA) on SB when vibration feedback was applied for 4 weeks. METHODS: This was a prospective, single-arm, open-label, intervention study. Ten participants diagnosed with "definite" SB wore a specially designed OA for 45 nights in a home-setting. A force-based SB detection system, including a pressure-sensitive piezoelectric film placed internally in the OA, triggered a vibrator attached to the OA. Vibratory stimulation was withheld during the first 2-week adaptation period (1st-15th nights), applied during the 4-week stimulation period (16th-43rd nights), and again withheld during the post-stimulation period (44th and 45th nights). The number and duration of SB episodes/hour of sleep were calculated based on masseter electromyographic activity recorded with in-home portable polysomnography and compared between the 15th and 45th nights (without stimulation) and the 17th and 43rd nights (with stimulation). RESULTS: The number and duration of SB episodes significantly decreased after vibratory stimulation (15th vs. 17th nights: p = 0.012 and p = 0.012, respectively), then significantly increased upon cessation of vibratory stimulation after the stimulation period (43rd vs. 45th nights: p = 0.023 and p = 0.023, respectively). CONCLUSION: Contingent vibratory stimulation through an OA may suppress SB-related masticatory muscle activity continuously for 4 weeks and may be an effective alternative for the management of SB. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://jrct.niph.go.jp/ ; trial registration number: jRCTs032190225.

A pilot study to test the validity of a piezoelectric intra-splint force detector for monitoring of sleep bruxism in comparison to portable polysomnography.

PURPOSE: To test the validity of a force-based detection system (ISFD: intra-splint force detector) to record sleep bruxism (SB) in comparison to portable polysomnography (PSG). METHODS: Simultaneous portable PSG recordings with a masseter electromyography (EMG) channel and ISFD with a deformation-sensitive piezoelectric film were performed on six participants with definite SB. First, simulated bruxism behaviors (static clenching, grinding, tapping, and rhythmic clenching) were recorded using both EMG and ISFD. Using these data, interval and duration criteria for ISFD data conditioning were established. Then, portable PSG recordings were conducted with the ISFD during sleep. Using the above criteria, ISFD events were compared with EMG-based SB episodes (the gold standard), and the sensitivity and positive predictive value of ISFD events were calculated. Spearman's correlation coefficients between true-positive ISFD events and SB episodes were then calculated. RESULTS: Among the tested conditioning criteria, a 3-s interval combined with a 1-s duration was selected. The median sensitivity and positive predictive value for the ISFD were 0.861 and 0.585, respectively. The duration of true-positive ISFD events was correlated with that of EMG-based SB episodes (rho = 0.658, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: ISFD has validity for SB detection and could be an alternative to single-channel EMG-based recordings.

Effect of contingent vibratory stimulus via an oral appliance on sleep bruxism after the splint adaptation period.

BACKGROUND: Contingent 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. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to shed light on the effects of vibratory stimuli on SB after the OA adaptation period, when its inhibitory effects are diminished. METHODS: Fourteen '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. RESULTS: The 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. CONCLUSION: Contingent vibratory stimulus via an OA may be effective for the management of SB even after adaptation to OA.