Cardiopulmonary effects of using mouthguards during medium and high intensities in elite Egyptian boxing athletes

IntroductionIn recent decades, sports participation has become more competitive. It is distinguished that orofacial injuries have become amongst the most frequent and problematic implications sustained during competitive physical activities (Tuna and Ozel, 2014). Furthermore, numerous boxing and combat sport injuries are to the head and neck regions either deliberately or accidentally (Zazryn, McCrory, & Cameron, 2008). It has been demonstrated that contact to the head causes injuries such as concussion, soft-tissue lacerations, or fracture of the facial skeleton (Mantri, Mantri, Deogade, & Bhasin, 2014). Consequently, Mouthguards can supply guarding from concussion, dentoalveolar injury, and fractures of the facial skeleton (Saini 2011; Hendrick, Farrelly, & Jagger, 2008; Knapik et al., 2007; Mihalik et al., 2007). It was stated by the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (2008) that mouthguards supposed to be utilized in 29 sports or exercise activities. As protective equipment, mouthguards are intended to be worn over front teeth and absorb the force connected with any clashes; subsequently reducing the incidence of dental/oral injuries (Bemelmanns, & Pfeiffer, 2001; Lim, Robinovitch, & Goodman, 2005; Tuna & Ozel, 2014). Accordingly, rigidity of perioral lacerations and combat- connected dental injuries might be minimized by the usage of mouthguard.Regarding to intraoral sports mouthguards, there are three basic types existing to supply guarding to athletes (Knapik et al., 2007; Bemelmanns, & Pfeiffer, 2001; Maeda, Kumamoto, Yagi, & Ikebe, 2009). Type I-stock mouthguards (SM) designed for usage without adjustment. Type II-boil-and-bite mouthguards, a thermo-plastic fabric can be modified in shape to person's mouth. Type III-custom fitted mouthguards (CFM) are shaped on a dental model of person's mouth, fabricated by heat pressure or vacuum forming procedures (Newsome, Tran, & Cooke, 2001). Types I and II are more known by most athletes than type III CFM (Newsome et al., 2001). CFM type could protect or reduce facial and dentoalveolar trauma resulting from athletic activity (Berry, Miller, & Leow, 2005; Gardiner, & Ranalli, 2000), minimize the frequent dissatisfactions informed by instructors and athletes (Knapik et al., 2007; Craig, Godwin, 2002; Lim et al., 2005). When athlete commences to exercise, breathing happens across both oral and nasal airways. During exercise, most of inhaled air comes into the lungs through the oral way (Amis, Di Somma , Bacha, & Wheatley, 2000). Therefore, mouthguards could show bigger obstacle to expiratory air flow during breathing. Unfortunately, there are comparatively few studies available looking at the effect of using mouthguards during exercise on ventilation, and more studies are needed to cognize these associations.Based on previous findings (Garner, Dudgeon, Scheett, & McDivitt, 2011; Gebauer, Williamson, Wallman, & Dawson 2011; von et al., 2008; Francis, & Brasher, 1991), the impact of using mouthguards on ventilation through exercise is still confused. Conducting experiments on this trend possibly will help to decide if using mouthguards affecting cardiopulmonary variables or not. For that reason, the aim of this study was to examine the cardiopulmonary effects of using different types of mouthguards during medium and high intensities in elite Egyptian boxing athletes.MethodParticipantsTwenty four men elite boxers belong to Zagazig sports clubs participated in regional and national competitions were recruited for the study. Six of them retreated through the experiments, remaining 18 participants [mean (SD) rang: age, 19.4 (2.01) 17.8-24.2 years; height, 1.74 (7.9) 165.3-1.96 cm; body mass, 74.5 (5.1) 62 . 9-88.4 kg; hemoglobin, 14.8 (2.4) 13.7-15.9 g/dl; training age, 3.8 (1.77) 1.4-7.1 years]. Participants were given information concerning the study objectives, requirements, advantages, and risks prior to providing the written consent. …