ABSTRACT
Objective: To compare outcomes for appliances manufactured utilizing the George Gauge™ Registration (GGR) and the Sibilant Phoneme Registration (SPR). It was hypothesized that there would be no difference in outcomes.Methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of two groups. Each group consisted of 20 oral appliances manufactured utilizing the GGR and 20 utilizing the SPR.Results: For the two-site data, no difference in outcomes was demonstrated (p = .24). The SPR method required fewer calibrations (p = 5.6 × 10-3) and less jaw movement (p = 3.33 × 10-4). Both bite methods resulted in similarly variable post-AHI scores (p = .52). For the eight-site data, no difference in outcomes was demonstrated (p = .76). The SPR required less movement of the jaw (p = 4.52 × 10-5); however, outcome variance was larger for the SPR (p = .036).Conclusion: The study null hypothesis of no difference in outcomes was supported.Abbreviations: AHI: Apnea-Hypopnea Index; GGR: George Gauge Registration; SPR: Sibilant Phoneme Registration; OSA: Obstructive Sleep Apnea; OA: Oral Appliance; OAT: Oral Appliance Therapy; MA: Mandibular Advancement; VDO: Vertical Dimensional Opening; AADSM: American Academy of Dental Sleep Medicine; ABDSM: American Board of Dental Sleep Medicine; BMI: Body Mass Index.
