The Influence of Customized Mouthguards on the Muscular Activity of the Masticatory Muscles at Maximum Bite and Motor Performance During Static and Dynamic Exercises

• Published in: Sports medicine - open Vol. 7; no. 1
• Main Authors: Lässing, Johannes, Pökel, Christoph, Lingener, Lennart, Falz, Roberto, Kwast, Stefan, Schulze, Antina, Busse, Martin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 01.12.2021; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Muscle function; Original; Original Research Article; Sports Medicine; Improved activation symmetry; Concurrent activation potentiation; Performance enhancing effects; Remote voluntary contraction
• DOI: 10.1186/s40798-021-00354-2
• ISSN: 2199-1170

Background Some studies have suggested that a mouthguard is a performance-enhancing device due to a remote voluntary contraction. The extent to which a mouthguard can induce this phenomenon, e.g., by potentially increasing biting, has not been clarified. This study’s aim was to investigate the muscular activity of the maxillary and peripheral musculature and motor performance during a rest and exercise test. Methods Our study comprised 12 active, male, professional young handball players (age 18.83 ± 0.39 years). Their performance, electromyographic (EMG) muscle activity ( Σ ), and lateral deviation ( Δ ) of the masticatory and peripheral musculature were measured during rest in a maximum bite force measurement, one-legged stand, a kettlebell swing exercise and a jump test while wearing a customized mouthguard (CMG) or not wearing one (Co). Results Maximum bite force measurements did not differ significantly in their mean values of muscle activity ( Σ ) for the masseter and temporalis muscles (Co 647.6 ± 212.8 µV vs. CMG 724.3 ± 257.1 µV p  = 0.08) (Co 457.2 ± 135.5 µV vs. CMG 426.6 ± 169.3 µV p  = 0.38) with versus without CMG. We found no differences in the mean activation values during a one-legged stand, the kettlebell swing, and jump test ( Σ ) in any of the muscles tested. Lateral deviations ( Δ ) wearing a CMG were significantly less in the erector spinae during the kettlebell swing (Co 5.33 ± 3.4 µV vs. CMG 2.53 ± 1.8 µV p  = 0.01) and countermovement jump (Co 37.90 ± 30.6 µV vs. CMG 17.83 ± 22.3 µV p  = 0.03) compared to the performance without a CMG. Jump height, rotation moment, and balance were unchanged with versus without CMG. Conclusion Our results at rest and during specific motor stress show no differences with or without a CMG. The improved peripheral muscular balance while wearing a CMG indicates improved muscular stabilization.