Mouth Breathing
Conditions
Keywords
mouthguard, ventilation, anaerobic power, ergogenic effects
Brief summary
The latest findings on the ergogenic effects of a dentistry-design, bite-aligning mouthpiece require additional research to assess its impact on anaerobic ability and ventilatory parameters. This study was aimed at determining the ergogenic acute effects of wearing a custom-made mouthpiece on oral airflow dynamics, Wingate Test performance parameters.
Detailed description
The objectives of this study are to investigate the acute effects of a customized, bite-aligning mouthpiece on the different parameters assessed during a Wingate Test, as compared to clenching the jaw without a mouthpiece, in a physically-active, male population. The study also investigate the influence of wearing a mouthpiece on non-forced and forced airflow dynamics, as compared to open mouth and a jaw clenching without mouthpiece. Mouthpieces are made using a new scanning method that simplified the fitting process and lowered its cost. A nonrandomized study was designed to compare the effect of the occlusion condition on the anaerobic power and airflow dynamics. Conditions of wearing or not wearing mouthguard (MOUTHG and NO-MOUTHG, respectively) are randomly distributed in all tests. Each subject participate in three sessions. The first session is used to obtain informed consent assess anthropometric measurements and to scan the subject's mouth structure. In the second session, subjects are familiarized with the test protocols via a learning session that included demonstration of Wingate Test and the airflow dynamics measurements. Subjects also perform the airflow tests and the first Wingate Test trial. In the third session, subjects perform the second Wingate Test trial. Conditions are randomly distributed in all tests. Wingate Test trials were separated by three days and subjects were not allowed to perform intensive training workloads.
Interventions
DEVICEMouthguard
Condition of wearing mouthguard
DEVICENo mouthguard
Condition without mouthguard
Sponsors
University Ramon Llull
Study design
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
19 Years to 30 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Healthy physical active males
Exclusion criteria
* Acute or chronic injury that caused pain during testing procedures * Temporomandibular joint disorders
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Changes in performance in Wingate test | 3 trials spaced 48 hours (each trial 30 seconds) | Anaerobic power and capacity are assessed using the Wingate test with and without mouthguard (MOUTHG and NO-MOUTHG, respectively). Subjects complete a 30-sec maximal effort on an ergometer at a resistance equivalent to 7.5% of their body mass. The ergometer is interfaced with a computer loaded with software (Wingate Software Version 1.11, Lode BV) that apply the appropriate load for each subject. As a warm-up procedure, subjects are instructed to begin pedaling for 5 minutes at 100 W and approximately 60 rpm. After a 5 second count down and without altering the mentioned parameters, subjects are asked to begin pedaling as fast as possible while receiving verbal encouragement throughout the test. Peak power (W) and mean power (W) are calculated and recorded in an online data acquisition system. |
| Changes in performance dynamics airflow measurements. | 3 trials spaced 3 minutes (each trial 30 seconds) | Subjects are asked to breath at resting pace during 30-sec under three different conditions: open mouth without mouthguard, jaw clenching without mouthguard and jaw clenched with mouthguard (OMNM, JCNM and JCM, respectively). Subjects intercalate 30 second forced breathings under the same conditions. Rest time was 3 minutes after both measurements under each condition. Conditions are randomly distributed. Facemask and is connected to a Biopac MP100 system through the wide-range airflow transducer amplifier. Peak air flow is detected and mean air flow during the 30 second interval is calculated for all conditions in L•min-1. |
Outcome results
None listed