↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Mandibular positioning techniques to improve sleep quality in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: current perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in Nature and science of sleep, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Mandibular positioning techniques to improve sleep quality in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: current perspectives
Published in
Nature and science of sleep, February 2018
DOI 10.2147/nss.s135760
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sofie Wilkens Knappe, Liselotte Sonnesen

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to review 1) mandibular advancement device (MAD) - indication, treatment success, and side effects; 2) maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) surgery of the jaws - indication, treatment success, and side effects; and 3) current perspectives. Both MAD and MMA are administered to increase the upper airway volume and reduce the collapsibility of the upper airway. MAD is noninvasive and is indicated as a first-stage treatment in adult patients with mild-to-moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and in patients with severe OSA unable to adhere to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). MAD remains inferior to CPAP in reducing the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) with a treatment success ranging between 24% and 72%. However, patient compliance to MAD is greater, and with regard to subjective sleepiness and health outcomes, MAD and CPAP have been found to be similarly effective. Short-term side effects of MAD are minor and often transient. Long-term side effects primarily appear as changes in the dental occlusion related to decreases in overjet and overbite. MMA is efficacious but highly invasive and indicated as a second-stage treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe OSA, with prior failure to other treatment modalities or with craniofacial abnormalities. The surgical success and cure rates are found to be 86.0% and 43.2%, respectively. Side effects may appear as postsurgical complications such as temporary facial paresthesia and compromised facial esthetics. However, most patients report satisfaction with their postsurgical appearance. Both treatment modalities require experienced clinicians and multidisciplinary approaches in order to efficaciously treat OSA patients. Some researchers do propose possible predictors of treatment success, but clear patient selection criteria and clinical predictive values for treatment success are still needed in both treatment modalities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 12 14%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 26 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Unspecified 1 1%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 32 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Nature and science of sleep
#443
of 629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,821
of 448,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature and science of sleep
#8
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.