Tags

, , , ,

should in my opinion not be recommended or not even be considered. If there is a need for the above mentioned appliances there is always to be a diagnosis that can support their therapeutic aims. The dentist is the person who is qualified for the decision to be made before any intervention into the oral cavity. It is also of great importance that the oral device is made or fabricated in the correct mandibular position or in the correct relationship between the two jaws.

Most often the indication for an occlusal device is that the patient ( person in pain) is lacking an oral stability, which is being described by the patient as he/she does not know “how to bite”. This is mostly the reason why the patient is searching for a stable occlusion and this seems too often to  be the reason for the bruxing, used in advertisement as the indication for testing the prefabricated oral device.

When a prefabricated oral device is being applied or tried out by the patient him/herself the following is most likely to occur. The patient is biting into a mandibular position recognised and commonly  used as the bruxoposition. In other words, the patient does not get a new symmetrically balanced occlusion on the device. The search for stability will therefore go on. Another disadvantage with the kit for a prefabricated occlusal device is the softness of the material to be used.A soft material between the upper and lower jaws in a bruxer seems to function more as a resilient chewing gum instead of creating an oral stability. Thereby  the bruxing will continue and sometimes even increase. In conclusion, the promised relief in using the prefabricated splint will never occur.

A functioning splint definitely needs to be designed, checked, delivered and monitored by the dentist.