Treatment, airway and compliance effects of a titratable oral appliance.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To measure the effects of a titratable anterior mandibular repositioner on airway size and Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) and to evaluate its compliance. DESIGN: Before and after insertion sleep studies were obtained in a total of 38 OSA patients of varying severity from three different sites. Covert compliance was measured by means of a newly-developed, miniaturized, temperature-sensitive, imbedded monitor. Validity testing was completed in six adult volunteers who wore monitors imbedded into small acrylic appliances. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The mean RDI before treatment was 32.6 (SEM 2.1) and after the insertion of the appliance, the RDI was reduced to 12.1 (SEM 1.7, p<0.001). RDI was reduced to less than 15/hour in 80% of a group of moderate OSA patients (RDI 15 to 30) and in 61% of a group of severe OSA patients (RDI > 30) with respect to baseline RDI. Fiber optic video endoscopy was performed on 9 OSA patients with and without the appliance. No significant differences in hypopharynx or oropharynx cross sectional areas were found, but at the level of the velopharynx, the airway size was significantly increased (p<0.05). The index of agreement was 0.99 between the monitor clock time and the subject's log sheets. Compliance data from eight OSA subjects instructed to wear the appliance during sleep indicated that it was worn for a mean of 6.8 hours with a range of 5.6 to 7.5 hours per night. CONCLUSION: The titratable adjustable mandibular advancement appliance, made from thermoelastic acrylic, significantly reduces RDI in moderate to severe OSA patients, has a direct effect on airway size and is well worn throughout the night.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".