No abstract

To treat sleep bruxism (SB), symptomatic therapy using stabilisation splints (SS) is frequently used. However, their effects on psychological stress and sleep quality have not yet been examined fully. The objective of this study was to clarify the effects of SS use on psychological stress and sleep quality. The subjects (11 men, 12 women) were healthy volunteers. A crossover design was used. Sleep measurements were performed for three consecutive days or longer without (baseline) or with an SS or palatal splint (PS), and data for the final day were evaluated. We measured masseter muscle activity during sleep using portable electromyography to evaluate SB. Furthermore, to compare psychological stress before and after sleep, assessments were made based on STAI-JYZ and the measurement of salivary chromogranin A. To compare each parameter among the three groups (baseline, SS and PS), Friedman's and Dunn's tests were used. From the results of the baseline measurements, eight subjects were identified as high group and 15 as low group. Among the high group, a marked decrease in the number of bruxism events per hour and an increase in the difference in the total STAI Y-1 scores were observed in the SS group compared with those at baseline (P < 0·05). No significant difference was observed in sleep stages. SS use may be effective in reducing the number of SB events, while it may increase psychological stress levels, and SS use did not apparently influence sleep stages.

Background Sleep bruxism (SB) causes many dental problems and complications with fixed partial dentures on implants. Although it is an important issue in clinical dentistry, no reliable treatment is available for SB. In the present study, we employed the electromyographic biofeedback device SleepGuard TM , which is attached to the forehead, detects SB, and alerts subjects with a gentle beeping sound to stop SB. The aim of the present study was to clarify the effects of biofeedback treatment on the incidence of masticatory muscle activity, sleep quality, and psychological stress levels.Materials and methods Ten subjects (five male and five female subjects) participated in the study, and a crossover design was used. Sleep measurements were taken on three consecutive nights to obtain data without SleepGuard TM (baseline group), with SleepGuard TM with the beeping sound (on group), and with SleepGuard TM without the beeping sound (off group). Data obtained on the final day were evaluated. STAI-JYZ scores were assessed and salivary chromogranin A (CgA) levels and cortisol concentrations were measured to compare psychological and physical stress after sleep. Friedman's and Dunn's tests were used to compare each parameter among the three groups.Results A marked decrease was observed in the incidence of SB events per hour in seven subjects in the on group. The beeping of SleepGuard TM did not affect the percentage of sleep stages, salivary CgA levels, cortisol concentrations, or STAI-JYZ scores. ConclusionOur results suggest that biofeedback therapy with a beeping sound inhibited SB without negatively impacting sleep quality or psychological stress.