Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2025
Author Spotlight: Traditional Chinese Medicine for Sleep Disorders in Acute COPD — A Safe, Cost-Effective Approach
Published on: October 18, 2024
Mandibular Advancement vs Combined Airway and Positional Therapy for Snoring: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Patrick Ioerger1,2, Azadeh Afshari3, Firas Hentati1,4
1Clinical Outcomes Research Office, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Importance:
Approximately 150 million individuals in the US snore in the absence of obstructive sleep apnea (primary snoring), but few studies have examined the efficacy of treatments for snoring or evaluated the effect of snoring in sleeping partners.
Objective:
To evaluate the efficacy of 2 treatments for primary snoring.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This pilot randomized clinical trial that included a convenience sample of people who snore without sleep apnea and their sleeping partner who underwent 4 weeks of snoring treatment was conducted at an academic medical center between October 3, 2022, and July 3, 2023.
Interventions:
Fifty couples were randomized to either use a mandibular advancement device (MAD) or receive combined airway and positional therapy (CAPT; external nasal dilator, nasal saline lavage with mometasone, mouth taping, and lateral positional therapy).
Main Outcome And Measure:
Percentage of sleeping partners who reported that their partner's snoring was either very much improved or much improved (responder) on the Clinical Global Impression of Improvement scale.
Results:
A total of 42 dyads completed the study; 23 (55%) were randomized to MAD and 19 (45%) to CAPT. Among people who snore, 26 (62%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 48 (14) years. Of 23 dyads randomized to MAD, 21 people who snore (91%) were rated by the sleeping partner as a responder, while 11 of the 19 dyads (58%) randomized to CAPT were rated by the sleeping partner as responder, resulting in a difference of 33 percentage points (95% CI, 8-58) and a number needed to treat of 3. Of the 10 participants who were withdrawn, 4 were withdrawn due to adverse effects of the treatment that were evenly distributed between the MAD (n = 2) and CAPT (n = 2) groups.
Conclusion And Relevance:
The results of this randomized clinical trial showed that the MAD may be more effective than CAPT for treating primary snoring, while both treatment options were found to reduce primary snoring. Physicians should have a patient-centered discussion to determine which treatment is best for individual patients with primary snoring, weighing convenience, adverse effects, and cost as factors.
Trial Registration:
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05756647.
