Effectiveness of Mouthguards for the Prevention of Orofacial Injuries and Concussions in Sports: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Sport activities can account for up to one-third of all orofacial injuries. Mouthguards (MGs) have been proposed as a way to reduce these injuries.
To present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of MGs for the prevention of sports-related orofacial injuries and concussions.
Using specific search terms, PubMed, Ovid Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched to find studies that (1) contained original quantitative data on MGs and orofacial injuries and/or concussions, (2) included groups involved in sports or exercise activities, (3) included MG users and non-MG users, and (4) provided either risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) comparing injuries among MG users and non-MG users, or data that could be used to calculate RRs and 95% CIs.
Twenty-six studies met the review criteria. Investigations employed a variety of study designs, utilized different types of MGs, used widely varying injury case definitions, and had multiple methodological weaknesses. Despite these limitations, meta-analyses indicated that the use of MGs reduced the overall risk of orofacial injuries in 12 cohort trials (summary RR [nonusers/users] = 2.33, 95% CI 1.59–3.44), and 11 trials involving self-report questionnaires (summary RR [nonusers/users] = 2.32, 95% CI 1.04–5.13). The influence of MGs on concussion incidence in five cohort studies was modest (summary RR [nonusers/users] = 1.25, 95% CI 0.90–1.74).
These data indicate that MGs should be used in sports activities where there is significant orofacial injury risk.
We would like to thank Mr Kristin Goel, Ms Claudia Coleman, and Ms Patricia Brennen for assisting us with finding many of the references cited here.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
No sources of funding were used for this work.
Conflict of interest
Joseph Knapik, Blake Hoedebecke, Georgia Rogers, Marilyn Sharp, and Steven Marshall declare that they have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this work.
The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the author(s) and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the Army or the Department of Defense.
- 1.Oral health in America: a report of the Surgeon General. 2000 [cited 2018 27 August]; https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/research/data-statistics/surgeon-general. Accessed 27 Aug 2018.
- 12.Marshall SW, Spencer RJ. Concussion in rugby: the hidden epidemic. J Athl Training. 2001;36(3):334–8.Google Scholar
- 17.Mayer C. Tooth protectors for boxers. Oral Hyg. 1930;20:298–9.Google Scholar
- 20.American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Standard practice for care and use of athletic mouth protectors. Report: American Society for Testing and Materials; 2000. Report No.: F697-00.Google Scholar
- 29.Using mouthguards to reduce the incidence and severity of sports-related oral trauma. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137:1712–20.Google Scholar
- 30.2013–14 NCAA Sports Medicine Handbook (24th Edition): Indianapolis, IL: National Collegiate Athletic Association 2013.Google Scholar
- 31.Sports Medicine Handbook (4th Edition). Indianapolis IN: National Federation of State High School Associations; 2011.Google Scholar
- 34.Hawn KL, Visser MF, Sexton PJ. Enforcement of mouthguard use and athlete compliance in National Collegiate Athletic Association men’s collegiate ice hockey competition. J Athl Training. 2002;37(2):204–8.Google Scholar
- 35.American Dental Association. Statement on athletic mouthguards 2009 [cited 2018 3 September]; https://www.ada.org/~/media/ADA/Science%20and%20Research/Files/SCI_Statement%20on%20Athletic%20Mouthguards_2016Oct24.pdf?la=en. Accessed 3 Sept 2018.
- 44.Dean AG, Sullivan KM. Open Source Epidemiologic Statistics for Public Health, Version 3.01. 2013 [cited 2018 10 August]; http://www.openepi.com/Menu/OE_Menu.htm.
- 52.Cohen A. A five year comparative study of various mouth protectors. Pennsylvania Dent J. 1962;29(7):6–12.Google Scholar
- 53.Cohen A, Borish AL. A four year comparative study of various mouth protectors. Bull Nat Assoc Secondary Sch Princ. 1961;45:145–8.Google Scholar
- 54.Cohen A, Borish AL. Mouth protector project for football players in Philadelphia high schools. J Am Dent Assoc. 1958;56(6):863–4.Google Scholar
- 55.Dunbar D. Report on reduction in mouth injuries. J Mass Dent Soc. 1962;11(31):34–5.Google Scholar
- 56.Schoen G. Report on reduction in mouth injuries. Bull Naussau Cty Dent Soc. 1956;30:12–4.Google Scholar
- 60.Benson BW, Meeuwisse WH. The risk of concussion associated with mouthguard use among professional hockey players. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39(6):374–5.Google Scholar
- 64.BoD Education. Evaluation of mouth protectors used by high school football players. J Am Dent Assoc. 1963;66:430–42.Google Scholar
- 74.Aubry M, Cantu R, Dvorak J, et al. Summary and agreement statement of the first International Conference on Concussion in Sports, Vienna 2001. Br J Sports Med. 2002;36(1):6–10.Google Scholar
- 77.Faraoni D, Schaefer ST. Randomized controlled trials vs. observational studies: why not just live together? BMC Anesthesiol. 2016;16:102.Google Scholar
- 80.Chisholm DA, Romanow NT, Schneider KJ, et al. Mouthguard use in youth ice hockey and the incidence of concussion and dental injury. Clin J Sports Med. 2015;25(1):e13–4.Google Scholar
- 82.Winters JE. Commentary: role of properly fitted mouthguards in prevention of sports-related concussion. J Athl Training. 2001;36(3):339–41.Google Scholar