Citation

McClelland C, Kinirons M, Geary L. Br. J. Sports Med. 1999; 33(3): 186-189.

Affiliation

School of Dentistry, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1999, BMJ Publishing Group)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

10378071

PMCID

PMC1756163

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient perception of custom made mouthguards of ideal and less than ideal designs in terms of their comfort and "wearability". METHOD: A mouthguard of ideal design (A) and one incorporating common design faults of underextension and unadjusted occlusion (B) were provided for 22 active sportsmen and women. They were not informed of the details of the design or the status of the protector. Half the participants were asked to wear mouthguard A first and the other half wore B first, each worn for one hour on two consecutive nights. Questionnaires were used to evaluate and rate the comfort and wearability of each mouthguard. RESULTS: Eighteen people completed the study. The ideal appliance was rated as significantly more retentive and comfortable overall and specifically was more comfortable to lips, gums, and tongue. It was also recognised as being less bulky, less likely to keep the teeth apart, or to cause pain in the jaw muscles. CONCLUSIONS: Comfort is likely to be increased if mouthguards are extended labially to within 2 mm of the vestibular reflection, adjusted to allow even occlusal contact, rounded at the buccal peripheries, and tapered at the palatal edges.